UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Challenging the myth of ’Young Germany" : conflict and consensus in the works of Karl Gutzkow, Heinrich… Kinney, Tracey Jane 1997

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata


831-ubc_1997-250792.pdf [ 14.21MB ]
JSON: 831-1.0088195.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0088195-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0088195-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0088195-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0088195-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0088195-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0088195-source.json
Full Text

Full Text

Challenging the Myth o f Young Germany': Conflict and Consensus in the Works of Karl Gutzkow, Heinrich Laube Theodor Mundt and Ludolf Wienbarg by Tracey Jane Kinney B.A., The University of Victoria M.A., The University of Victoria A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES Department of History We accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA August 1997 © Tracey Jane Kinney, 1997 In presenting this; thesis in partial'." fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make it freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of my department or by his or her representatives. It is understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. Department of H ' S T o d ^ l The University of British Columbia' Vancouver, Canada Date JO DE-6 (2/88) ABSTRACT On December 10, 1835 the Federal Diet of the German Confederation banned the publication and distribution of any works written by a group identified as "das junge Deutschland." The Diet explicitly named Karl Gutzkow, Heinrich Laube, Theodor Mundt, Ludolf Wienbarg, and Heinrich Heine as members of this group. Since 1835 the term "Young Germany" has been widely accepted among historians and literary analysts alike. However, there has been virtually no agreement regarding the purposes of the group, its importance, or even its membership. In recent years, historical studies have gradually come to accept that the notion of a unified group called "Young Germany" is a myth, but no study has attempted to identify the key issues which divided the so-called Young Germans. This study examines the content of the 'Young German' works in the years prior to the Federal ban in order to determine the nature of the disagreements which divided Gutzkow, Laube, Mundt and Wienbarg. By utilizing the voluminous monographic and journalistic works produced by the so-called Young Germans, this study establishes their positions on many of the key issues of the Vormarz era, in particular, the emancipation of women, religious emancipation and Saint-Simonianism, and political emancipation. Based upon these positions, this study argues that there was little consensus among the core 'members.' Each man believed that he was contributing to the creation of a new type of literature which would end the Romantic separation of literature from the real world and usher in a more utilitarian form of writing. The author would no longer serve only the muses of literature, he would also serve more practical causes. Beyond this shared conviction, however, there were few issues upon which Gutzkow, Laube, Mundt and Wienbarg agreed. Moreover, even on the basic assumption that writers and ii their works must serve practical causes there was considerable conflict regarding the implementation of this ideal. On the larger socio-political issues of the day there was virtually no agreement. Some of the 'Young Germans' expressed fairly traditional opinions on these topics, others were remarkably modern. Seldom if ever, however, did they speak with one voice. iii T A B L E OF CONTENTS Abstract ii Table of Contents iv Acknowledgement v Chapter One: Critical Issues Surrounding the Study of the 'Young German' Phenomenon 1 Chapter Two: The Inter-Relationship Among the 'Young Germans' as Demonstrated in their Journalistic Efforts 61 Chapter Three: The Question of Female Emancipation in the Works of the 'Young German' Authors 95 Chapter Four: Religious Emancipation and Saint-Simonianism in the Works of the 'Young German' Authors 154 Chapter Five: The Problem of Political Emancipation in the Works of the 'Young German' Authors 206 Conclusion 261 Bibliography 269 Appendix A: Documents Relating to Young Germany 279 i. Text of the Prussian Ban against Young Germany 279 ii. Karlsbad Resolutions 281 iii. Provisions of the Bundesakte and Wiener Schlufiakte Regarding a Uniform Press Law: 282 Appendix B: The Impact of Censorship on Young Germany: 283 i. Self-Censorship in Karl Gutzkow's Work 283 ii . Prussian Ban Issued Against Madonna: Unterhaltungen mit einer Heiligen 286 iii. The Impact of Censorship on Gutzkow's Watty and Mundt's Madonna 287 iv A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T : The completion of this dissertation would not have been possible without the help of numerous people. While I cannot possibly thank everyone in such a short space, I would like to single out several people who have made tremendous contributions to the completion of this project. I must begin by thanking Patrick Dunn and all of the staff in Inter-Library Loans Department of the library who were able to find material even when I provided them with the most cryptic of references. Without their help in securing sources, often on very short notice, this dissertation could not have been completed. In the History Department at the University of British Columbia I would like to thank the following individuals: my supervisor Dr. L .E . Hill whose vigilance and thoroughness ensured that this dissertation was logical, clear and concise, despite my constant attempts to undo his efforts with my convoluted prose; Dr. David Breen who provided encouragement and support over the final year of the project; and Dr. Christopher Friedrichs whose graduate seminar first provoked my interest in this topic. I would also like to thank my former supervisor at the University of Victoria, Dr. Thomas Saunders, for his generous assistance and encouragement over the past several years. I must also thank my friends and family for offering their support over the past eight years. M y parents, David and Norma Kay, have been an unwavering source of reassurance and encouragement through this and every other project I have undertaken. I would also like to thank my grandparents for continually asking when my dissertation would be finished, and my mother- and father-in-law, Charles and Jean Kinney, for their support. The advice and encouragement from my colleagues at Kwantlen University College helped to give me the incentive to complete the final work. In particular, I would like to thank Frank Abbott and Betty Rideout, my office-mates, for their willingness to listen to my rantings over the past year. And finally, I would like to thank my husband Jonathan for his patience and understanding and, most importantly, for helping me to keep my sanity through a very long and frequently arduous process. He provided a much-needed voice of reason and support without which this project could not have been completed. CHAPTER ONE: Critical Issues Surrounding the Study of the 'Young German' Phenomenon Between 1830 and 1835 much of the German literary community was scandalized by the writings of a group of men known to the authorities as the Young Germans.1 The literary efforts of Karl Gutzkow, Heinrich Laube, Theodor Mundt and Ludolf Wienbarg polarized the opinion of the reading public. A young Friedrich Engels dismissed the Young Germans as "woolly-headed phrase-makers"2 whose overall importance was negligible. However, Wolfgang Menzel, a leading Vormdrz literary critic, argued that the writings of the Young Germans were "gegen das vaterlandische Interesse"3 because their writings undermined the foundations of all states, religions and customs. No less a figure than Prince Klemens von Metternich argued that the edict of suppression which eventually prohibited the production and distribution of their works was necessary to preserve the political structure of the state.4 In the 1830s the term 'junges Deutschland was used in a largely derogatory fashion. Their enemies had a two-fold purpose in invoking the term. It was certain to resonate with the authorities who were acutely aware of the activities of Giuseppe Mazzini's Young Italy and ^he name was coined following Ludolf Wienbarg's dedication of Aesthetische Feldziige (Hamburg: Hoffmann und Campe, 1834) to "das junge Deutschland." 2Friedrich Engels quoted in Hermann Boeschenstein, German Literature of the Nineteenth Century (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1969), 18. 3Wolfgang Menzel, "Die junge Literatur," Morgenblatt fur gebildete Stdnde, Literaturblatt Nr. 1 (1.1.183 5). 4Jefffey L . Sammons, Six Essays on the Young German Novel (Chapel Hill , NC: University of North Carolina Press, 1972), 26. 1 were thus quick to conclude that Young Germany might pose a similar threat to the Metternichian system. Most often, however, the enemies of the new literature used the term 'jeune Allemagne' to emphasize the dangerous pro-French, materialist approach of the writers. Among contemporary literary historians and critics the term remains popular despite the fact that it has been argued convincingly that "as a group, Young Germany was largely imaginary, a fiction put into circulation by the Federal German ban on Heine, Gutzkow, Laube, Wienbarg and Mundt of December 10, 1835."5 Many literary historians and critics now acknowledge that the study of 'Young Germany' as a single literary group is immensely problematic. "Never has there been a literary movement the members of which were so much at odds with one another, and this atomization was intensified by the government assault."6 Recent scholarship has increasingly evinced a split on the Young German question. Most contemporary historians accept that there were more issues that divided the Young Germans than united them. As James Sheehan had observed "they were different in temperament, character, and fate...."7 However, most current literary analyses continue to claim that the term has some utility. As Jeffrey Sammons noted, "there are good impressionistic reasons for maintaining "Young Germany" as a useful term. In the core group of writers there is a special quality of intense urgency.... It is more a matter of pitch and gesture, simultaneously robust and bewildered, crowding insistently close to the reader in the 5Ibid., 1. Sammons is paraphrasing Harold Jantz, "Sequence and Continuity in Nineteenth-Century German Literature," Germanic Review 38 (1963), 27. 6Sammons, Six Essays, 14. 7James J. Sheehan, Germany 1770-1866 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1989), 580. 2 effort to arouse in him some resonance and motion." Urgency, pitch and gesture aside, there are a vast number of issues which divided the core group of authors who were identified with 'Young Germany.' To date no study has attempted to identify the central issues upon which Gutzkow, Laube, Mundt and Wienbarg differed. This study will undertake such an analysis. By examining the material produced by the so-called Young Germans in the years prior to the ban, this study will first identify the issues which preoccupied the core group and then analyze the degree to which their positions on these issues varied. However, before any such analysis can be undertaken it is first necessary to establish more clearly the nature of contemporary scholarship on the so-called Young Germans. It is further important to examine some of the methodological issues confronting any study of this 'group.' One must also acknowledge the limitations which were imposed on the core group of writers by the environment in which they operated. Finally, the personal backgrounds of the so-called Young Germans and the early influences on them are important in establishing the key issues which motivated each man. 1. Given the sharply polarized nature of the initial reaction to the so-called Young German movement, it is hardly surprising that subsequent study has produced no consensus upon them. Though most historical and literary works on the Vormarz era have ventured a conclusion on the role and place of the Young Germans, at times it is difficult to determine whether they are all discussing the same group. Young Germany has been a frequent subject for both literary 8Sammons, Six Essays, 2-3. 3 analysts and historians of the Vormdrz era. While some degree of consensus is evident in the works of literary analysts, the historical literature remains inconclusive. It is nonetheless possible to detect a gradual evolution in the conclusions of historians on Young Germany. One of the first historians to give serious thought to the nature and importance of the Young German phenomenon was Heinrich von Treitschke. He dismissed the Young Germans as an insignificant literary movement that was French and Judaic in origin and thus doomed from the outset.9 Treitschke was particularly opposed to Gutzkow, who he believed had attempted to desecrate the tomb of Schleiermacher by publishing the latter's Vertraute Briefe on Schlegel's Lucinde. Treitschke concluded that the Young Germans displayed no talent, only mockery and lamented that the movement was symbolic of the "power of Jewry during those few years."10 However, over the years which followed opinion on the Young Germans has moderated substantially. In 1952 C P . Magill undertook a re-evaluation of the Young German movement and concluded that "[t]here were in existence several Young Germanys; the men who in their own eyes were warriors in the very vanguard of human emancipation, appeared to their opponents on the right as subversive doctrinaires and to their radical critics on the left as aimless dilettanti."11 heinrich von Treitschke, History of Germany in the Nineteenth Century, v. 5, transl. Eden and Cedar Paul (London: Jarrold and Sons, 1919), 524. Treitschke believed that the movement was rooted in the works of Heinrich Heine, Ludwig Borne, and Rahel Varnhagen von Ense. l0Ibid., 530. n C . P . Magill, "Young Germany: A Re-evaluation," in German Studies Presented to L.A. Willoughby (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1952), 108-119. 4 In his 1954 history of Germany Koppel Pinson emphasized the Young German commitment to human emancipation. Pinson argued that the movement had been inspired by the French Revolution and was thus motivated above all by a thirst for liberty.12 The Young Germans were opposed to the excesses of Romanticism and in favour of spiritual emancipation, the rights of youth and a literature that identified with life. Pinson also viewed the Young Germans as the innovators of a realistic style of political journalism (Feuilletonism) in Germany.13 Pinson's opinion regarding the importance of the Young Germans was not, however, shared by some of his contemporaries. Just four years after Pinson's history Golo Mann deemed the Young Germans unworthy of mention in his Deutsche Geschichte des 19. und 20. Jahrhunderts.u The lack of interest in Young Germany evident in Mann's work was replicated in Agatha Ramm's 1967 history of Germany. Raram mentioned the Young Germans, but only as a precursor to the Young Hegelian movement.15 She also observed that they produced only one great writer, Heine, who introduced the group to Saint-Simonianism and a type of sentimental socialism. Ramm identified the leader of the Young Germans as one "F. Gutzkow Koppel S. Pinson, Modem Germany: Its History and Civilization, 2" Edition (New York: MacMillan, 1966 [1954]), 65. "Ibid., 66. 1 4Golo Mann, History of Germany since 1789 (New York: Praeger, 1968); originally published in 1958 as Deutsche Geschichte des 19. und 20. Jahrhunderts. 1 5Agatha Ramm, Germany 1789-1919: A Political History (London: Methuen, 1967), 126-7. 5 [sic]" whose work was as upsetting to traditional values as D.F. StrauB' Das Leben Jesu. Two years later, however, William Carr produced a more sophisticated analysis which identified the Young Germans as a school of writers and journalists who had revolted against the established order and denounced Romanticism as an ally of the reaction.17 Carr added that the Young Germans looked to France and Belgium for their inspiration and as a result declared war on Germany's princely houses. In 1971 Eda Sagarra wrote that the Young Germans reflected a potential never realized in Germany, a potential to recognize the positive place of technology in society and to demonstrate a genuine concern for the condition of their fellow men.18 However, ten years later George Mosse returned to the argument that the Young Germans were a minor literary movement which pursued so many diverse causes that it accomplished nothing of substance in the end.19 A more sophisticated analysis of the Young German movement can be found in Thomas Nipperdey's Germany from Napoleon to Bismarck.20 Nipperdey sees the Young Germans as an integral part of the reaction to the revolutions of 1830. Inspired by Heine, the Young Germans 16Ibid., 126. 1 7William H . Carr, A History of Germany 1815-1990, 4 t h Edition (London: Edward Arnold, 1991 [1969]), 19 and 29. 1 8Eda Sagarra, Tradition and Revolution: German Literature and Society 1830-1890 (London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1971), 149. 19George L . Mosse, The Germans (New York: G.P. Putnam's Sons, 1982), 157. 20Thomas Nipperdey, Germany from Napoleon to Bismarck 1800-1866, transl. Daniel Nolan (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1996); originally published in German in 1983 as Deutsche Geschichte 1800-1866. Biirgerwelt und starker Stoat. 6 emerged in 1834 flouting tradition and convention, religion and church-inspired morality. They also championed the emancipation of women and of the flesh.21 The Young Germans were significant because they had a mobilising and politicising effect on the reading public and on public opinion. Above all they intensified critical reflection and ensured that the literary world became increasingly bourgeois in its outlook.22 A l l of these early historical studies contain one common assumption. The Young Germans were a single group. More recently, however, historians have begun to question this assumption. James Sheehan notes that the Young Germans were different in temperament, character and fate. Nonetheless he goes on to note that the 'Young Germans' - together with a score of other writers who are sometimes associated with them - shared a set of historical experiences which gave their work from the mid-1830s... a similar emotional tone and critical inclination. Never a school or a movement, the 'young Germans' belonged together because of their common discomfort with traditional culture and existing social values.23 Contemporary literary analyses have no such difficulties in considering the Young Germans to be a single school. Given the ideologically and methodologically polarized nature of literary historiography, this degree of unanimity seems somewhat unusual. However, the literary histories seem to agree that the Young Germans24 were a single movement whose 21Ibid., 329-330. 22Ibid., 330 and 511-518. 23Sheehan, German History 1770-1866, 580-581; emphasis added. 2 4 Most literary historians and critics exclude Heine from the group, since his importance to literary historiography reaches far beyond his association with the Young Germans. 7 primary accomplishment was the creation of a new understanding of the role and function of literature, as well as an entirely new type of literature. This in turn resulted in a new intellectual openness and eventually a new political openness.25 Despite the fact that few literary historians have examined the political programme of the Young Germans in detail, all seem to accept that it was the Young German discussion of concepts such as freedom, liberalism and democracy which paved the way for the political upheavals of the 1840s. Most importantly, the Young Germans represented an important transitional phase in literary history. The goal of the new literature, and of the new criticism which accompanied it, was to co-ordinate literature with life—to make ideas relate to the realities of the world around them, rather than continue the aesthetic aloofness characteristic of the Romantic period. As Hartmut Steinecke noted: [They] were the first critics, writing at the end of the 'artistic period', under journalistic conditions, who worked as 'free' writers.... [The Young Germans] spanned the period between a generally aesthetic consciousness and an ethical-political one, between author-oriented and reader-oriented literature; therefore an important critical manifestation.26 The clearest statement of this position can be found in Peter Uwe Hohendahl, Building a National Literature: The Case of Germany 1830-1870, transl. Renate Baron Franciscono (Ithaca, N Y : Cornell University Press, 1989), 107. See also Hartmut Steinecke, Literaturkritik des jungen Deutschlands (Berlin: E . Schmidt, 1982). Udo Koster, Literarischer Radikalismus. Zeitbewufitsein und Geschichtsphilosophie in der Entwicklung vom Jungen Deutschland zur Hegelischen Linken (Frankfurt am Main: Athenaum, 1972) sees the work of the Young Germans as an integral part of the expanding literary industry which in turn facilitated the expansion of liberal-democratic political views and the general modernization of society. Rainer Rosenberg, Literaturverhdltnisse im deutschen Vormdrz (Munich: Kurbisken, 1975) goes so far as to argue that while Young Germany did not make the revolutions of 1848, their contributions to the bourgeois emancipation struggle certainly served as preparation for them. 26Steinecke, Literaturkritik des jungen Deutschland, 57. 8 Steinecke further observed that this transitional role was facilitated by the general expansion of the literary market and attendant publication possibilities opened up by that expansion. Thus for literary historians and critics the Young Germans are considered to be a group because they represented a common style of writing, one which broke with the aestheticism of the Romantic period and ushered in a literature that was at once more realistic and more functional. A recent study by Takanori Teraoka also supports this interpretation27 as does the earlier work of Jeffrey Sammons who observed that 'Young Germany' is a useful term because, "[t]here is a sense of intense urgency characteristic of Young German writing and by which it is identifiable."28 Though few literary histories go beyond stylistic similarities in explaining their consideration of Young Germany as a unified group, a recent article by Robert Holub attempts to provide additional justification. Holub argues that there are three criteria which support the thesis that the Young Germans represented a single group: they were all born after 1800; they all preferred to work in the cities rather than the countryside; and they all demonstrated a propensity for liberal values.29 Holub is then forced to backtrack by admitting that Heine, whom he includes among the Young Germans, was in fact born before 1800 but nonetheless can be included because Heine liked to claim that he came in with the new century. The 2 7Takanori Teraoka, Stil und Stildiskurs des Jungen Deutschland (Hamburg: Hoffmann und Campe/Heinrich Heine Verlag, 1993), 44. 28Sammons, Six Essays, 2 and 28. 2 9Robert C. Holub, "Young Germany," A Concise History of German Literature to 1900, Kim Vivian, ed. (Columbia, SC: Camden House, 1992), 225. 9 problem with such a broad categorization is that nearly any writer could be made to fit this definition, even writers who were implacably opposed to the ideas advanced by Gutzkow and the others. Moreover, 'liberal values' can be taken to include an enormous range of ideas, and Holub does not provide a definition which might narrow the concept so as to make it a useful analytical tool. Less specialized sources tend to resolve the uncertainty surrounding the role and function of 'Young Germany' by presenting the movement as akin to Young Italy. Young Germany thus becomes a romantic association committed to nationalism and the creation of a unified German state.30 This mistaken notion likely stems from confusion regarding terminology. When Wienbarg dedicated Asthetische Feldzuge to 'das junge Deutschland' he was unaware that a branch of Mazzini's Young Italy movement had been established in Switzerland and was referring to itself as 'das junge Deutschland.' While the two movements were entirely unconnected, subsequent attempts by the Frarikfurt police to establish a connection between them has led to enduring confusion regarding the literary 'Young Germany.'31 Among authors who have made a serious study of the movement there can be no doubt that Heinrich Hubert Houben was the seminal authority on the Young German movement and its adherents. His work, which was begun before the First World War and continued far into 3 0See for example Frederick B. Artz, Reaction and Revolution 1814-1832 (New York: Harper and Row, 1934), 263-292. 3 1 On this subject see Nipperdey, Germany from Napoleon to Bismarck, 331. Mazzini hoped to see the establishment of a "Young Europe" movement of which Young Italy would be one part, the splinter group Young Germany another, and so on. 10 the Weimar years, was in large part responsible for reviving scholarly and popular interest in the Young Germans. From his first work, Gutzkow-Funde,32 to his last, a two-volume compilation, Verbotene Literatur von der klassischen Zeit biszur Gegenwart*3 Houben made the Young German movement the central focus of his studies. Houben provided a wealth of material on each of the Young German authors as well as some of the lesser-known writers who were closely associated with the central figures. Houben considered the Young Germans to be a vital i f sadly neglected part of the literary and political culture of the Vormdrz era. Houben also emphasized a strong liberal-democratic tradition among the Young Germans. Given Houben's accepted position as an expert on the Young German movement, this emphasis on liberalism and democracy has likely influenced subsequent attempts to discover the liberal-democratic orientation of the Young Germans. Houben's work also argued that the Young Germans, among whom he counted Karl Gutzkow, Theodor Mundt, Heinrich Laube, Ludolf Wienbarg, Ferdinand Kiihne and Heinrich Heine, were a single literary group, connected not only by the Reichstag ban, but also by their interests, their opinions and their literary style. For the present-day historian, one of the most valuable contributions made by Houben was his meticulous two-volume cataloguing of the major journals and much of the 3 2Heinrich Hubert Houben, Gutzkow-Funde. Beitrdge zur Literatur- und Kulturgeschichte des neunzehnten Jahrhunderts (Berlin: Wolff, 1901). 3 3Heinrich Hubert Houben, Verbotene Literatur von der klassischen Zeit bis zur Gegenwart: Ein kritisch-historisches Lexikon tiber verbotene Biicher, Zeitschriften, und Theaterstucke, Schriftsteller und Verleger, 2 Bde. (Berlin: Rowohlt, 1924 & Bremen: Schiinemann, 1928); (Hildesheim: Georg Olms, 1965). 11 correspondence of the various Young German authors. Two years later Houben followed this work with Jungdeutscher Sturm und Drang,35 the first complete history of the Young German movement to be drawn entirely from archival sources. However, Houben's final work was somewhat disappointing. Though richly detailed with regards to the daily travails of the Young Germans and the omni-present censor, the work lacked any degree of analysis as to the impact of that censorship upon their later works. 3 6 Nonetheless, the wealth of documentary material provided by Houben in each of his studies is an invaluable resource in reconstructing the complex history of the Young German movement. In more recent years, Alfred Estermann has also done a considerable amount to preserve the works of the Young German authors. In conjunction with Athenaum Press in Frankfurt, it was Estermann who spearheaded the daunting task of editing, annotating and publishing many of the surviving Young German journals, a project which was completed between 1970 and 1973. Estermann also published a two-volume compilation of documents by and about the Young Germans.37 Like Houben's, Estermann's work provides an important 3 4Heinrich Hubert Houben, Zeitschriften des jungen Deutschlands, 2 Bde. (Berlin: Behr, 1906/1909); (Hildesheim: Georg Olms, 1970). A planned third volume, which was never completed would presumably have included several journals omitted from the original two volumes. The major journal omissions are Zeitung fiir die elegante Welt (edited by Laube in 1833/1834), Mitternachtzeitung fur gebildete Stdnde (also edited by Laube in 1836), and Telegraph fur Deutschland (edited by Gutzkow in 1837/1838). 3 5Heinrich Hubert Houben, Jungdeutscher Sturm und Drang. Ergebnisse und Studien (Leipzig: Brockhaus, 1911); (Hildesheim: Georg Olms, 1974). 3 6Heinrich Hubert Houben, Polizei und Zensur (Berlin: 1926); reprinted in 1978 by Tannus under the title Der ewige Zensur: Langs- und Querschnitte durch die Geschichte der Buch- und Theaterzensur. 3 7Alfred Estermann, Politische Avantgarde, 1830-1840 (Frankfurt: Athenaum, 1972). 12 source of documentary material for the contemporary historian. E . M . Butler, one of the few English-speaking historians to study the Young Germans in depth, produced in 1926 what might be the most ambitious study to date of the Young German movement.38 Rather than simply focus on the place of the Young Germans in the history of literature, Butler attempted to characterize the beliefs which motivated them. Butler identified a common set of causes which she believed to be the key to the Young German programme: the equality of men and women, the call for secularism and necessity for a new social order. Butler saw each of these beliefs as symptomatic of the attraction of the Young German authors to Saint-Simonian beliefs, concluding that each of the Young Germans had been influenced in one way or another by the Saint-Simonian belief that history had entered a new critical epoch. The Young Germans were the first and, in Germany, perhaps the last group to recognize that knowledge had outstripped the ability of religion to explain all known facts and they had thus entered an era of skepticism and disorder. Butler also argued that the Young Germans believed in the rehabilitation of the flesh and the equality of the spiritual and the sensual realms.39 As interesting as Butler's thesis was, she was unable to demonstrate convincingly that any of the Young Germans were ardent followers of Henri de Saint-Simon or Prosper Enfantin.40 Certainly, the Young German journals contained a few articles written by and about 3 8 Eliza M . Butler, The Saint-Simonian Religion in Germany: A Study of the Young German Movement, 2 n d Edition (New York: Howard Fertig, 1968 [1926]). 39Ibid, 66-86. 40Claude-Henri de Rouvroy, Comte de Saint-Simon (1760-1825) wrote his most famous work Nouveau Christianisme in 1825. In it he argued that the era of the great monotheistic religions had passed and in its place a new religion was emerging which was 13 the Saint-Simonians, but by Butler's own admission the Young German authors themselves remained frustratingly silent on the topic. Laube, though initially intrigued by the doctrines of Saint-Simon, evidently grew suspicious of the Saint-Simonians as the years passed, a fact which Butler wrote off as symptomatic of his "elementary spiritual development."41 Gutzkow in 1839 declared a slight knowledge of the Saint-Simonians, but claimed to have had no contact with their doctrines. Despite this Butler argued that the influence "was secretly at work within him before 1835."42 Butler had similar problems demonstrating that any of the others were influenced in any significant and long-lasting way by the doctrines of Saint-Simon. However, her work remains an important contribution to the literature on the Young Germans. Overall, this survey of the past literature on the Young German movement reveals one fundamental fact. There is no general consensus as to the role and function of the Young German writers. While literary analysts agree on some issues, historians do not. Thus the 'Young Germans' appear simultaneously as a minor literary movement and at the same time a vital part of the transition to a new literary era. They have been represented as liberals, democrats, liberal-democrats, early German nationalists and Saint-Simonians. While to some guided by the principle 'love thy neighbour as thyself and which would achieve the complete emancipation of the flesh. Barthelemy Prosper Enfantin (1790-1864) built upon the ideas of Saint-Simon adding the notion that man and woman together make up the ideal social individual. The Saint-Simonians believed that change could always be made for the better and that a new world was unfolding based on the power of technology to improve the condition of mankind. The version of Saint-Simonianism which reached Germany was concerned almost exclusively with the emancipation of the flesh and not with the doctrines of possibilism and technocracy. 4 1Butler, The Saint-Simonian Religion., 182. "Ibid, 273. 14 they were merely woolly-headed phrase-makers, to others they were the key agents in making social-political problems a legitimate topic of discussion in the public sphere. This study will take as its starting point James Sheehan's conclusions on the so-called Young German movement. The 'Young Germans' shared a set of experiences which gave their work a similar critical tone and inclination. Above all they were irreconcilably opposed to the reactionary state. However, at a fundamental level, the idea of "Young Germany" was a myth. On each of the major issues which the so-called Young Germans addressed there was substantial disagreement among the key authors. Their major works reveal diametrically opposed viewpoints and even where there was some degree of agreement regarding the existence of a particular problem, the 'Young Germans' more often than not differed upon the resolution of that problem. 2. Three key methodological questions must be confronted before any serious study of the Young German programme can by undertaken. One must first address the issue of membership: which writers make up the core of the movement that has been labelled Young Germany? Next the contentious question of periodization must be addressed. Finally one must confront the problematic issue of sources, in particular the use of fictional works as an indicator of an author's personal position on a topic. On the first question, that of membership, there is no disagreement among historians that Karl Gutzkow, Ludolf Wienbarg, Theodor Mundt and Heinrich Laube were members of the inner circle of Young German writers. The Reichstag ban, however, included the writings of Heinrich Heine among the proscribed works and explicitly named Heine as a part of Young Germany. This has subsequently led several 15 historians, including Houben, to argue that Heine must be included as one of the core members of the Young German movement. For his part Heine's interest in the Young Germans was minimal. He refused to acknowledge any link to the other members of the group and when the ban was issued observed that fj]ust as sometimes revolutionaries who have never seen each other and harbour opposing views are accused and are condemned before the same tribunal of a criminal conspiracy, so my name was arbitrarily linked and proscribed with four others who did not really belong together and who held heterogeneous principles.43 Heine's outrage at his inclusion in the ban was further evident in a letter that he sent to the Frankfurt Diet immediately following the ban: "Sie haben mich angeklagt, gerichtet, verurtheilt, ohne dafi Sie mich weder schriftlich noch miindlich vernommen, ohne dafi jemand meine Vertheidigung gefuhrt, ohne daB irgend eine Ladung an mich ergangen.... [N]ehmen Sie das Interdikt zuriick, das Sie iiber Alles was ich schreibe verhangt haben."44 Nonetheless, Houben and others, including E . M . Butler and Robert Holub, have argued that Heine's influence on the age was so profound that he must be counted within the ranks of the Young Germans. The inclusion of Heine raises a number of difficulties. Writing in the relative safety of his Parisian exile, Heine faced none of the restrictions which confronted those writers who chose to remain in Germany. Thus while he addressed many of the same themes which 4 3Heinrich Heine, "Letters on Germany" in Jost Hermand and Robert C. Holub, eds. Heinrich Heine: The Romantic School and other Essays (NewYork: Continuum, 1985), 293. ^Heinrich Heine, " A la haute Diete de la confederation germanique a Francfort," reprinted in Jan-Christoph Hauschild, Verboten! Das Junge Deutschland 1835. Literatur und Zensur im Vormdrz (Dusseldorf: Droste Verlag, 1985), 50. 16 interested Gutzkow, Laube, Mundt and Wienbarg, he had far more freedom to explore those issues than did the others.45 As James Sheehan notes, "his [Heine's] was a politics of exile and alienation. Like so many of those forced to emigrate or be silent, Heine remained on the periphery of public discourse, without the responsibilities of action and the burdens of compromise."46 This fact alone makes any direct comparison of Heine's interests with those of the other 'Young Germans' problematic. In addition, though Heine broke with the extreme subjectivity of the Romantic era, his writings still insisted upon the sovereignty of art rather than the functionalism advocated by the so-called Young Germans.47 Finally, Heine's work lacks the immediacy and urgency which characterizes the writings of Gutzkow, Laube, Mundt and Wienbarg. As Sammons has noted, "[i]n the older men, Ludwig Borne and Heine, the urgency is under firmer rhetorical or artistic control."4 8 Thus, even some of the literary histories also see fit to exclude Heine from the core group of writers. Though most literary approaches do not include Heine, they do generally incorporate a much larger number of writers in the core group. Jeffrey Sammons, for example, rejects Heine but includes Ferdinand Gustav Kuhne 4 9 and Karl Immermann,50 though in both cases he 4 5 0 n Heine's 'political' interests see Nigel Reeves, Heinrich Heine: Poetry and Politics (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1974). 46Sheehan, German History 1770-1866, 586. 47Nipperdey, Germany from Napoleon to Bismarck, 511. 48Sammons, Six Essays, 4. 4 9 In addition to Sammons, Houben included Kuhne (1806-1888) albeit as a minor figure in the overall movement, as did Walter Dietze, Junges Deutschland und deutsche Klassik. Zur Asthetik und Literaturtheorie des Vormdrz (Berlin: Riitten & Loening, 1962). In 1834 Kuhne, 17 acknowledges that the stylistic intensity which marked them as members of Young Germany existed only briefly.51 Takanori Teraoka includes Ludwig Borne (1786-1837) because of the stylistic affinity between Borne's later writings and those of the other Young Germans.52 Using stylistic similarity as his guide, Jost Hermand is able to list some twenty-five writers under the label Young Germany,53 including Gustav Schlesier54 and Karl August Varnhagen von Ense.5 5 who was based in Leipzig, worked with Mundt as a co-editor of Literarischer Zodiacus. He was heavily involved in the controversy surrounding Bettina von Arnim's Goethes Briefwechsel mit einem Kind. Kuhne's most important work Eine Quarantine im Irrenhause (Leipzig: Brockhaus, 1835) was considered at the time to be typical of the Young German style. In 1843 Kuhne became the editor for the Zeitung fur die elegante Welt and was responsible for the hiring of Heinrich Laube as theatre critic. However, Gutzkow rejected Kuhne's work out of hand and the only strong connection in the period before the Reichstag ban is the one between Kuhne and Mundt. Finally, Kuhne's work was clearly not viewed in the same light as the others by the censors as Kuhne was not named in the Reichstag ban. 5 0 Karl Leberecht Immermann (1796-1840) was a regional court judge in Dusseldorf. His most important work Die Epigonen appeared in 1835 at the height of the Young German controversy. Though Sammons considers him to be one of the Young Germans he acknowledges that Immermann's realistic skills were greater than the others and that he differed with Gutzkow regarding the degree of reform that was achievable through literature; Sammons, Six Essays, 124-150. Gutzkow considered Immermann to be part of the older literary aristocracy. Karl Gutzkow, "Karl Immermann in Hamburg," Telegraph fur Deutschland, Nrs. 153 and 154 (September 1840); GWIII, 134-150. 5Gammons, Six Essays, 2-3. 52Teraoka, Stil und Stildiskurs des Jungen Deutschland, 38. 53Jost Hermand, Hrsg., Das junge Deutschland. Texte und Dokumente (Stuttgart: Philipp Reclam, 1966). 54Gustav Schlesier (1811-1866) worked with Laube on the Zeitung fur die elegante Welt and later assumed the editorship of that journal. Gutzkow's correspondence reveals that he maintained a cordial relationship with Schlesier during and after the ban. 5 5 Two factors tie Karl August Varnhagen von Ense (1785-1858) to the Young Germans. He was friendly with all of the authors, especially Gutzkow, with whom he 18 Using similar criteria, a more recent study has argued that the writing style of Furst Hermann von Piickler-Muskau5 6 resembles that of the other 'Young Germans.'57 This study also argues that Piickler's liberal convictions and progressive political thinking mark him as a member of Young Germany. However, the study acknowledges that Piickler argued in favour of the maintenance of the monarchy and the aristocracy, something which no-one else in the core group was willing to support.58 In each of the above cases there are unquestionably stylistic similarities between the works. Beyond these similarities, however, there are few solid connections between the four major figures and the host of other writers who have been considered part of 'Young Germany.' Thus it is more methodologically sound to limit the Young German movement to the key group of four authors among whom direct and stable connections can be established. A recent study by Helmut Koopmann supports this approach. Koopmann places Gutzkow, Mundt, Laube and Wienbarg on the front line of the Young German movement, counts Heine maintained an active correspondence, and Varnhagen's publication of Das Buch Rahel in 1834, the diaries of his late wife, served as a major source of inspiration for Gutzkow and Mundt. See Chapter Three for a discussion of the issues which connected Mundt, Gutzkow and Rahel. "Hermann Furst von Piickler-Muskau (1785-1871) was Laube's mentor and provided shelter to the latter when he was sentenced to house arrest. Piickler-Muskau was also an author in his own right, publishing Briefe eines Verstorbenen both anonymously and under pseudonyms between 1830 and 1832, and TuttiFrutti in 1834. "Elvira Burklin-Aulinger, Geschichte in Literatur - Literatur als Geschichte. Furst Piicklers literarische Stellungnahme zu den historisch-politisch und sozialen Zustdnden seiner Zeit dargestellt an den Werken: Briefe eines Verstorbenen, Tutti Frutti und Suddstlicher Bildersaal. Unpublished PhD Dissertation. Vancouver, B C : University of British Columbia, 1993. 5*Ibid., 167-168. 19 and Borne as the choir-masters, conducting the movement from the sidelines, and views Kuhne, Varnhagen von Ense, Piickler-Muskau and the others who were certainly sympathetic to the cause as external supporters.59 While acknowledging the stylistic influence of the older generation of writers, especially Heine and Borne, this study will consider only the works of Karl Gutzkow, Heinrich Laube, Theodor Mundt and Ludolf Wienbarg to be central to the so-called Young German movement. The issue of periodization is less easily resolved. Koopmann suggests that any study of the group should be confined to the period 1830 to 1840, bounded on the one side by the July Revolutions and the 1832 death of Goethe and on the other by the complete breakdown of relations among the four key members.60 Sammons suggests that the stylistic quality which characterized the Young German movement was restricted for the most part to a half dozen years around 1835.61 Other analysts, including E . M . Butler and Heinrich Houben, evaluate the entire body of work produced by the Young Germans without regard for the date of 5 9Helmut Koopmann, Das junge Deutschland: eine Einfuhrung (Darmstadt: WissenschaftlicheBuchgesellschaft, 1993), 4. 60Ibid., 3; the idea that the relationship among the Young Germans broke down completely is somewhat misleading. After Ludolf Wienbarg became co-editor of Deutsches Literaturblatt der Borsen-Halle in 1840 he used his position to direct the attention of the public to the works of the other Young Germans once again. A brief survey of the work produced during the years that Wienbarg served as editor reveals reviews of Heinrich Laube's Jagdbrevier (Literaturblatt Nr. 12 19.12.1840 and Nr. 13 26.12.1840) and Der Prdtendent (Literaturblatt Nr•. 58 6.11.1841); Theodor Mundt's Volkerschau auf Reisen (Literaturblatt Nr. 18 30.1.1841, Nr. 19 6.2.1841, and Nr. 20 13.2.18841) and a lengthy series on Thomas Muntzer (Literaturblatt 72-76 12.2.1842 - 19.3.1842). However, Wienbarg maintained an unequivocal silence on Gutzkow's works from this era. 61Sammons, Six Essays, 3. 20 publication in order to reach their conclusions. This study accepts that 1830 is a logical starting point for any survey of 'Young German' literature. The July Revolution had a major impact upon the four men. As Gutzkow remarked, the July Revolution was a decisive turning point in his life: Der Kronprinz lachelte; aber alle, die Zeitungen lasen, wufiten, dafi in Frankreich eben ein Konig vom Thron gestofien wurde. Der Kanonendonner zwischen den Barrikaden von Paris drohnte bis in die Aula nach.... [I]ch stand betaubt an dem Portal des Universitatshofes und dachte fiber St.-Marc Girardins Prophezeiung und die deutsche Burschenschaft nach.... [I]ch wollte nur wissen, wieviel Tote und Verwundete es in Paris gegeben, ob die Barrikaden noch standen, ob noch die Lunten brennten, der Palast des Erzbischofs rauchte, ob Karl seinen Thron beweine, ob Lafayette eine Monarchic oder Republik machen wurde. Die Wissenschaft lag hinter, die Geschichte vor mir. 6 2 Finding a logical end point for a study of the movement is more contentious. The boundaries utilized by earlier studies have some degree of rationality. However, none of the previous examinations of the Young German movement have paid sufficient attention to the impact of the Reichstag ban when establishing the parameters of their studies.63 Prior to the December 1835 ban the ideas expressed by the Young Germans covered a broad range of topics with little or no self-censorship. Following the ban, however, three changes were immediately evident. First, both Mundt and Laube attempted to deny their involvement with the other 'Young Germans' and to establish the innocence and distinctiveness Karl Gutzkow, Vergangenheit und Gegenwart, 1830-1838 (Hamburg: Hoffmann und Campe, 1839), GWI11, 153-154. 63Sammons acknowledges that Laube was terrified by his imprisonment in 1834 but nonetheless bases his analysis of Laube's work on the second part of his Das junge Europa, Die Krieger, which was written in years immediately following his incarceration. Sammons, Six Essays, 26 and 104-123. 21 of their own works. As Mundt argued on December 27, 1835: Das Verbot gegen mich hat mir hinlanglich Anlass gegeben, iiber die bisher eingeschlagene Richtung meiner literarischen Laufbahn ernstlich nachzudenken. Gleichzeitige Bestrebungen anderer Schriftsteller, mit denen ich zusammen rangirt worden bin, ohne jemals gemeinsame Verabredung mit ihnen gehabt zu haben, sind mir offenbar ebenso schadlich, wenn nicht schadlischer geworden, als meinen eigene Jugend und meine eigenen Tendenzen. Ueber die letzteren bin ich dermassen mit mir zu Rathe gegangen, dass ich auf Ehre und Gewissen die Versicherung abgeben kann: es sei in mir kein gefahrlicher und verderblicher Widerspruch gegen die bestehende Ordnung in der sittlichen, religiosen, und politischen Welt vorhanden.64 Heinrich Laube publicly denied membership in Young Germany three times during December 1835 and in the early months of 1836.65 On January 1, 1836 he published his most overt renunciation: Eine junge Schriftstellerwelt, die 'junges Deutschland' genannt wird, spielt eine Rolle: wer gehort dazu, wer nicht? .. Ein fur allemal sei es denn Hermit gesagt, dafi unser Journal [Mitternachtzeitung] nicht dazu gehort, die Bestrebungen desselben werden von keiner Opposition eingegeben, die Institute unsrer Gesellschaft werden von demselben respektiert. Invektiven gegen diese Institute wie sie in neuerer Zeit vom 'jungen Deutschland' ausgegangen sind, werden bekampft.66 In addition to such denunciations of the movement, a marked change was apparent in subsequent publications by the so-called Young Germans. Their writings became much more cautious, a product of the obvious psychological impact of the ban. The psychological Theodor Mundt quoted in Houben, Zeitschriften des Jungen Deutschlands, Bd. 1, 156-157. 6 5Laube denied his involvement with the so-called Young Germans in the December 25, 1835 issue of the Allgemeine Zeitung, and again in the January 1, 1836 issue of the Mitternachtzeitung fur gebildete Stdnde. 6 6Heinrich Laube, "Erklarung," Mitternachtzeitung fur gebildete Stdnde, (January 1, 1836), 1. 22 repercussions were most succinctly summed up by Ludolf Wienbarg: Ich lebe still fur mich, den Wissenschaften und der Literatur, ich habe keine andern Verbindungen, als literarische und buchhandlerische, letztere nicht in Frankfurt. Ich bin unbescholten u fur meine Person burgerlich und polizeilich auBer Vorwurf. Sollte mein literarisches Streben nicht iiberall Billigung finden, so scheint mir dieses kein Motiv zu sein, mich, wo es auch sei in Deutschland, die Luff nicht einathmen zu lassen. Auch bin ich bereit, mich in dieser Hinsicht, vor jedem kompetenten Forum einzufinden.67 Finally, in the period following the ban, subsequent work by the Young Germans was limited by the practical difficulty of finding a publisher willing to risk a renewed affiliation with the proscribed authors and the restrictions which a series of parliamentary decrees passed in November and December 1835 placed upon the Young German authors. On December 10, 1835 the text of a ban then before the legislature of the free city of Hamburg was officially written into law as a Federal edict.68 By this edict each state was instructed to take action against the Young German writers and their publishers. A specific warning was directed toward the Hamburg publishing firm of Hoffmann and Campe and the Frankfurt publisher Carl Lbwenthal. The latter was ordered to stand trial alongside Karl Gutzkow in Mannheim oh charges of creating and fostering a blasphemous portrayal of Christianity and the Christian Church. The Federal edict, which was a strengthened version of a Prussian order of suppression originally issued on November 14,6 9 effectively banned the publication of any Wienbarg to the Frankfurt High Senate, 17.11.1835; in Houben, Jungdeutscher Sturm und Drang, 196. The abbreviations and grammatical inconsistensies appear in the original. 6 8See Appendix A(i) for the text of the Hamburg ban and several other permutations of the ban which were considered. 6 9See Appendix A(i) for the complete text of the original order of suppression. The primary change in the December 10 order was the inclusion of Heine's name. 23 works by the five so-called Young German authors and prohibited all journals edited by the Young Germans; in addition no reviews of their works could be published. During the subsequent Mannheim trial Gutzkow was forced to defend a series of passages from Watty, die Zweiflerin, most of which concerned aspects of Christian belief.70 Following the trial Gutzkow was found guilty on all charges and sentenced to four weeks in prison. Lowenthal, however, was acquitted on the grounds that he had not read the book prior to publishing it and could not therefore be held accountable for its contents.71 On February 16, 1836, the edict of suppression was commuted to a lifetime of special censorship. Finally in 1842 each of the Young German authors was given an opportunity to escape from the censorship restrictions by signing a pledge by which each man would promise not to concern himself with anything that might be offensive to the state, religion, or moral law. 7 2 Mundt, Laube and Wienbarg signed the pledges. Karl Gutzkow refused to sign the loyalty oath and thus special scrutiny of his work continued for another year until he finally signed a watered-down version of the oath in 1843. See Appendix B(iii) for a discussion of the specific passages upon which the Mannheim tribunal focussed. 7 1See Chapter Three for additional details on the fallacious nature of this defence. Carl Lowenthal was not only aware of the contents of the book but he was instrumental in the creation of one of its characters. It is interesting to note that although Theodor Mundt believed that the charges against Lowenthal were motivated by anti-Semitism, his acquittal indicated that not everyone was anxious to convict the man based solely on his religious convictions. See Theodor Mundt, "Feuilleton," Literarischer Zodiacus (October 1835), 298. 72Before signing his pledge Wienbarg had been able to gain a position as co-editor of the Deutsches Literaturblatt der Borsen-Halle, but in the summer of 1842, following the signing of the pledge, Wienbarg was promoted to chief editor. 24 In the years which followed the ban even Gutzkow demonstrated an uncharacteristic reticence to tackle controversial issues and a marked degree of self-censorship was evident in his works. This self-censorship was most evident in 1836, immediately following the Prussian order of suppression. In that year Gutzkow published a two-volume anthology of his major writings on the new literature under the title Beitrdge zur Geschichte der neuesten Literatur. The 1836 collection included all of Gutzkow's major reviews from 1835. However, Gutzkow made some significant changes to these reviews prior to their re-publication. A comparison of one of the original reviews from 1835 with the 1836 version reveals the degree to which the ban forced Gutzkow to qualify and edit his opinions.73 In March 1835 Gutzkow published a detailed review of the second volume of Heinrich Heine's Der Salon.74 However, in the 1836 reprint of the review he systematically edited out a series of telling passages.75 Any mention of the journals with which the Young Germans were so closely associated was deleted. Whereas the 1835 review had emphasized the fundamentally German nature of Heinrich Heine's work, by 1836 this assertion was gone, along with a reference to the fact that Heine's work discussed the nature of Christianity and Martin Luther. Any connection between Heine and the July Revolution including the 1835 claim that Heine's work had functioned as the shock troops of the revolution was omitted. A reference to 7 3 See Appendix B(i) for the complete comparison. 7 4 Karl Gutzkow, "Der Salon von Heinrich Heine. Zweiter Teil," Phonix: Fruhlingszeitungfur Deutschland, Literaturblatt Nr. 10 (11.3.1835), 237-239. 7 5 Karl Gutzkow, Beitrdge zur Geschichte der neuesten Literatur, Bd. 1 (Stuttgart: P.Balz'sche Buchhandlung, 1836), 79-89. 25 Germany's decaying institutions, which initially read "Heine will die Hiiter unsrer morschen Institutionen nur argern,"76 was removed and the specifics of Heine's attack on the Christian church were buried in the new phrase "es gibt noch immer gewisse Dinge in Staat, Religion, Sitte und Meinung des Volkes, fur welche Heine, wenn auch nicht sterben, doch einige Tage lang unpaB sein konnte."77 Finally, the belief that without Germany Heine was incomplete, a remark which again emphasized the essential connection between Heine and Germany, and a reference to Heine's genius were removed from the 1836 article. In addition to the revisions evident in Zur neuesten Literatur, Gutzkow also published two revised editions of Wally, die Zweiflerin, the novel which was primarily responsible for the imposition of the interdict against the Young Germans. In 1852 the first revised edition of Wally appeared under the new title Vergangene Tage with several telling changes. Wally was given parents in an apparent attempt to make her appear more human. An entire section which had described Wally's promise to appear naked before her lover and her eventual submission to him, a section which had been singled out by the Mannheim tribunal, was omitted and instead replaced by two new sentences the first of which indicated that Wally wanted to be Caesar's wife, and the second of which clarified that the union between the two was of a spiritual nature since they could never consummate their love. 7 8 In the same edition all references to an unspecified union between the two were replaced with the phrase 'spiritual union.' Gutzkow 7 6Gutzkow, "Der Salon," 238. 7 7Gutzkow, Beitrdge zur Geschichte, 88. 7 8 Karl Gutzkow, Vergangene Tage (Hamburg: Carl Lowenthal, 1852), 63-64. 26 then made additional changes in a final revision of Wally which was published in 1874. In this edition phrases attacking Christianity were either eliminated or rephrased to obscure their original intent. For example, Wally had originally remarked that it was nice to find mistakes in the Bible. This was subsequently changed to indicate that Wally was scandalized by this discovery. Additional changes made the relationship between Caesar and Wally appear to be a more traditional love story. The degree of self-censorship which Gutzkow was forced to undertake in the years following the ban severely constrained his ability, and according to some interpretations his willingness,79 to pursue controversial issues. According to Hartmut Steinecke, a similar degree of self-censorship can be seen in the work of Heinrich Laube.8 0 At the end of 1835 Laube published a collection of essays entitled Moderne Charakteristiken.*1 Though Laube had planned to include all of the major essays which he had produced during his tenure as editor of the Zeitung fur die elegante Welt, he omitted all of the work which discussed Heine, Borne and the other Young Germans rather than face further sanctions by the censorship authorities. As Steinecke noted, "...sein revolutionarer Elan war zum groBen Teil gebrochen."82 The overall result of the ban was the destruction of any common ground which might 79Peter Burgel's analysis of the young Gutzkow's letters examines the psychological stresses created by the ban and its repercussions. Peter Burgel, Die Briefs des fruhen Gutzkow 1830 - 1848. Pathographie einer Epoche (Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 1975). 8 0 Steinecke, Literaturkritik des Jungen Deutschland, 179. 8 1Heinrich Laube, Moderne Charakteristiken, 2Bde. (Mannheim: C. Lowenthal, 1835). 82Steinecke, Literaturkritik des Jungen Deutschlands, 179. 27 have existed between Mundt, Laube, Wienbarg and Gutzkow in the period prior to December 1835. The attempts of Mundt and Laube to deny their involvement in the Young German movement created a permanent riff between themselves and Gutzkow and Wienbarg. In addition, the ongoing self-censorship and the continuing intervention of the censors ensured that these men would be unable to regain the freedom to approach contentious topics which they had enjoyed prior to the ban. In later years any literary ventures by the Young German authors were greeted with great suspicion by the censors. Both Wienbarg83 and Gutzkow 8 4 attempted to launch new literary journals in the relatively liberal publishing climate of Hamburg, a place where Gutzkow believed that he could still speak freely because "die Zensur benimmt sich ganz verniinftig gegen mich. Noch manches freie Wort laGt sich hier aussprechen."85 The immediate result of both ventures, however, was a dramatic number of interventions by the censor, making these two journals the most highly censored of any periodicals published in Hamburg between 1819 and 1848.86 In 1842 Wienbarg assumed the position of editor of the Hamburger literarische und kritische Blatter (formerly the Literarische und kritische Blatter der Borsen-Halle), a position which he held until 1846. 8 4Gutzkow launched the Telegraph fur Deutschland in Hamburg in 1837; his participation in the journal persisted until 1838, though he continued to publish articles in the Telegraph in the 1840s. 8 5Gutzkow to Valerius Meidinger; Hamburg 5.3.1838; BdfG, 150. 8 6 A study by Margarete Kramer on the censorship apparatus in Hamburg notes that fifty-one articles from the Hamburger literarische und kritische Blatter were brought before the censor, of these nineteen were banned, nine were published with alterations, and twenty-three articles passed the censor without change. The record for Gutzkow's Telegraph fur Deutschland is even more startling. A total of eighty-nine articles (given the short life of the 28 Given the difficulties associated with determining the true message of works published in the wake of the federal ban, any attempt to discover the original issues which concerned the so-called Young Germans must be limited to the period prior to the ban. This study will take as its starting point 1830, the year of the July Revolution, and conclude with the flurry of works produced before the ban in December 1835.87 The final methodological issue which any study of the 'Young Germans' must confront concerns the nature of the sources available to the historian. The so-called Young Germans were prolific writers of novels, novellas,88 essays, travel diaries, letters, reviews and articles.89 Telegraph it would seem that this represents every article) were brought before the censor: thirty-six were banned outright, ten published with alterations, and forty-three passed without change; Margarete Kramer, Die Zensur in Hamburg 1819 bis 1848: Ein Beitrag zur Frage staatlicher Lenkung der Offentlichkeit wdhrend des Deutschen Vormdrz (Hamburg: Helmut Bruske, 1975), 378-388. 8 7The only exception to this rule is the inclusion of the Deutsche Revue, a new journal by Gutzkow and Wienbarg which was scheduled for publication in January 1836. There are constant references during the summer and autumn of 1835 to the articles which were to appear in the Deutsche Revue, thus it is apparent that the majority of this work was completed prior to the ban. In addition, at least one of the essays was published in other journals prior to the ban. Because of the periodization of this study some issues which became vitally important to the so-called Young Germans in later years cannot be fully analyzed. One such topic is Gutzkow's attitude towards the Jewish Question. Though he acknowledged that he wrestled with this issue prior to 1835, he remarked that he did not give serious thought to the topic until 1838; Houben, Jungdeutscher Sturm und Drang, 101. Thus the Jewish Question appears only peripherally in this study. 88Theodor Mundt remarked on the difference between novels and novellas in his 1833 work Kritische Wdlder. novels revealed developments of world-historical significance, especially through their depiction of the hero's development; whereas "[d]ie Novelle... ist gleichsam nur eine Episode aus dem Roman des Lebens." Theodor Mundt, Kritische Wdlder (Leipzig: Wohlbrecht, 1833), 140. 8 9 In large part this prolific output is a reflection of the uncertainty associated with a literary career during this time period. Securing an adequate income from literary production 29 Frequently these genres were combined within a single work. Diaries, letters and essayistic asides feature prominently in the novels produced by Gutzkow, Mundt and Laube.9 0 One thus finds that their writings often blur traditional distinctions between fact and fiction. Jeffrey Sammons has argued that "[m]uch of the content of the novels is essayistic, clothed in epistolary and dialogue form, and tends to the same characteristics as the rest of the corpus. At times the writers seem to have thought that the boundary between fiction and non-fiction could be erased altogether."91 The belief that the boundaries between fictional work and non-fictional work could be eliminated was due in large part to the fact that the 'Young German' view of literature was first and foremost a utilitarian one. Regardless of genre, the 'Young Germans' believed that literature must serve a single purpose, namely the radical reorientation of society. Walter Homberg has argued that [i]hrer universalistischen Tendenz gemaG ging es ihnen nicht nur um politische und soziale Reformen im engeren Sinne, z. B. um die Ablbsung der uberkommenen Strukturen und Institutionen, sondern sie erstrebten zugleich eine grundlegende Neuorientierung im Bereich der Moral und der Religion. 9 2 was difficult in the best of times. Gutzkow wrote more in his lifetime than Goethe but still complained in an 1852 letter that he seldom earned a comfortable living from his work: "Meine Existenz zwang mich, augenblicklich die Feder zu einer Arbeit zu ergreifen.... dafi ich nichts zu schreiben wiiGte, nein, dafi ich Alles, was ich schreibe, hervorgeben muG! DaG ich nichts wegwerfen, liegen lassen, lange feilen kann! O man spricht von den groBen Classikern, von Goethe, Schiller, Wieland, Herder, Jean Paul! Alle hatten Existenzen, hatten Pensionen." Karl Gutzkow quoted in Walter Hdmberg, Zeitgeist und Ideenschmuggel: die Kommunikations-strategie des Jungen Deutschland (Stuttgart: Metzler, 1975), 17. 9 0 Ludolf Wienbarg did not produce any novels during the period prior to 1835. 91Sammons, Six Essays, 8. 9 2H6mberg, Zeitgeist und Ideenschmuggel, 43. 30 The difficulty for the 'Young Germans' was that many of the changes which they advocated could not be discussed openly and directly given the repressive restrictions imposed by the Metternichian system of censorship. What was needed was a medium through which the contemporary socio-political system could be criticized and a viable alternative offered, without attracting the attention of the ever-present censors. The 'Young Germans' believed that both factual and fictional literature provided that medium. The literature of the 'Young Germans' was consciously designed to be critical. It condemned the existing social, religious, political and moral arrangements while offering alternative systems for the reader's consideration. However, 'Young German' literature was also crafted so as to evade the elaborate system of censorship. As Gutzkow noted "[a]mphibienartig leben wir halb auf dem Festlande der Politik, halb in den Gewassern der Dichtkunst."93 He went on to add that "Ideenschmuggel wird die Poesie des Lebens werden."94 Fiction was a particularly useful form of camouflage since it allowed the author to distance himself somewhat from the controversial causes supported by his characters. If challenged by the authorities he could argue that he was merely describing a situation and not advocating a particular viewpoint. Fiction was thus the 93Gutzkow quoted in Friedrich Andrae, "Bis unter den Zipfel der Nachtmiitze," Die Zeit, Nr. 2(10.01.1992), 13. 9iIbid. Gutzkow's belief in the political potential of literature owes much to Ludwig Borne's influence on him. Borne believed that literature could be placed in the service of political enlightenment and that a close relationship could be established between the critical literary text and the political debate of an era. The first forty-eight of Borne' sPolitische Briefe appeared in October 1831 and the young Gutzkow was fascinated by the letters. His subsequent work with Wolfgang Menzel on the Morgenblatt fur gebildete Stdnde deepened his respect for Borne's work; Wulf Wulfing, Junges Deutschland: Texte - Kontexte, Abbildungen, Kommentar (Munich: CarlHanser, 1978), 112. 31 most effective medium through which subversive ideas could be smuggled to the public without raising the suspicions of the censors. Heinrich Laube confirmed this view when he commented in the Elegante Welt that the novel offered the best possible form of camouflage for ideas which would otherwise be banned.95 Fiction also allowed the Young German authors to use the forms and language of the earlier romantic writers which were familiar to the censors, while at the same time introducing different themes.96 Romanticism continued to exert a powerful influence upon the so-called Young Germans though they themselves claimed that Young German literature was fundamentally different from the apolitical works of the Romantic German authors. The Romantic emphasis on the development of the individual, the pursuit of inner freedom, explorations of morality and the nature of religious belief were common themes in the 'Young German' novels. Gutzkow, Mundt and Laube were also deeply influenced by the early Romantic belief that artistic works could prepare the people to accept a new political system by educating and enlightening them. The early Romantics believed that their artistic works were a vehicle through which the potential of the individual could be fully realized. Thus they were able to explore alternative avenues of personal development which were denied to them by the present socio-political system. Romantic literature also displayed a similar tendency to blend multiple genres within a single work. 9 5Heinrich Laube, "Literatur," Zeitung fur die elegante Welt, Nr. 100 (23.05.1833), 398. 9 6 0 n the political ideas of the Romantics see Frederick G. Beiser, Enlightenment, Revolution and Romanticism: The Genesis of Modern German Political Thought, 1790-1800 (Cambridge, M A : Harvard University Press, 1992), 222-244. 32 For the historian of Young Germany the blurring of fact and fiction and the frequent resort to such romantic devices as analogy, signs, irony, wit and extravagant metaphors makes the interpretation of their novels extremely problematic. The voice of the author is seldom predominant, thus separating the views of the characters from the views of the author is often impossible. Nonetheless the fictional works were designed to create a new social order, thus their importance to the historian who seeks to understand the goals of the 'Young Germans' cannot be understated. In analysing the 'fictional' works of the so-called Young Germans this study has operated under the following assumptions. In a general sense the 'Young German' view of the author as a critic of contemporary society and his work as the vehicle by which a new order would be achieved, has been taken as evidence that all of the 'Young German' works, whether factual or fictional, express the author's own goals for his society. Even so every effort has been made to ensure that the ideas attributed to a particular author in a 'fictional' work have been substantiated by 'factual' pieces such as reviews and essays. In addition, several of the so-called Young Germans acknowledged directly that the views expressed in their novels did in fact represent their own opinion. Where this is the case it has been indicated in the text. 3. The early 1830s was a period of great change in the German states. A variety of oppositional groups were beginning to form, yet the Metternichian system remained as powerful as ever. Some understanding of the era, its origins and its defining characteristics is thus essential to any effort to interpret the actions of the men and women who lived during this period. Following the final defeat of Napoleon the German territories were reorganized into 33 thirty-eight territories and united into the German Confederation on June 8, 1815, ushering in a period that is commonly referred to as the Restoration Era. 9 8 The great personal prestige that had been gained by Klemens von Metternich (1773-1859) during the Wars of Liberation had enabled the Hapsburgs to dominate the discussions at the Congress of Vienna and the settlement which resulted represented Metternich's goals above all. Metternich's primary aim had been to ensure that the settlement was structured so as to avoid any continental instability which might encourage the territorial ambitions of the Russian Tsar. He also evinced a considerable personal antipathy towards any form of revolutionary upheaval.99 Prior to the settlement of 1815 there had been considerable discussion about the shape of the reconfigured German territories. Of greatest concern was the nature of the relationship between Austria and Prussia, but the leaders of the Mittelstaaten were also concerned that the settlement provide some recognition of the power and influence they had gained during the revolutionary wars. In 1814 Prussia's Karl August von Hardenberg (1750-1822) had argued in favour of an 'Eternal Confederation of German States.' Hardenberg's system would have been a two-tier federal structure under the joint leadership of Prussia and Austria. However, the 9 7The addition of Hesse-Homberg in 1818 raised this number to thirty-nine. 9 8This period is referred to variously as the Restoration Era (in reference to the restoration of the monarchies after the Napoleonic occupation), the Vormdrz era (a more specific reference to Germany in the period from 1815 to the March revolutions of 1848), and/or the Biedermeier period. The latter term has been preferred by social historians to refer to the period from 1815 to approximately 1850 when an idyllic vision of family life and clearly defined male and female roles dominated social discussion. "The standard biography of Metternich is Heinrich Ritter von Srbik, Metternich. Der Staatsmann und der Mensch, 3 Bde. (Munich: 1925-1954). 34 smaller states, in particular Wurttemberg and Hanover, rejected this plan outright as it severely constrained their power. In turn, Metternich proposed that the sovereign princes and leading free cities be formed into a confederation of independent states. This confederation would have one statutory institution, the Bundesversammlung, which would meet in Frankfurt. The Bundesversammlung would function as a Federal Diet. It would be attended by an ambassador from each of the states and would exercise executive authority over the member states. Austria alone would head the meetings of the Diet. The system which Metternich proposed was entrenched in the Bundesakte of June 18, 1815. Since several substantive problems had not been resolved by that date, they were postponed until the first meeting of the Diet. These issues included common provisions for defence, economic policies and legal institutions, the status of Jews in the Confederation, the position of the mediatized nobility, the drafting of a uniform press law 1 0 0 and the constitutional status of the member states. Each of these questions was designated by a specific provision of the Bundesakte for future discussion. Though the Vienna settlement was considered by many to be less than ideal, it did generate some substantial hope for the future. In particular, reformers were encouraged by Article Thirteen of the Bundesakte which stipulated that every state should have a landstdndische Verfassung, a representative constitution. Following the settlement, however, progress on Article Thirteen was frustratingly slow as a constitutional struggle immediately 1 0 0Article 18d. of the Bundesakte established that the first meeting of the Federal Diet should address the establishment of a uniform decree on press freedom and should ensure that the rights of writers and publishers were protected against unlawful duplication of their work. See Appendix A(iii) for the full text. 35 ensued. On one side were the defenders of the traditional estate system who saw the constitution as a way of protecting their particular interests from the ever-growing bureaucratic state. On the other side were the advocates of state sovereignty who saw the constitution as a way to unify and consolidate their states in the face of multiple particular interests. Though most states did adopt new constitutions in the years following the passage of Article Thirteen,101 they seldom matched the high hopes of the reformers. Considerable unrest thus developed centred primarily in Hesse-Darmstadt and Nassau. 1 0 2 The universities in particular emerged as the centres of the protest movement. The Burschenschqften, student organizations that had originated at the University of Jena, protested loudly against bureaucracy and excessive government.103 The growing discontent in the universities did not escape Metternich's attention. On September 20, 1819, using the assassination of the ultra-conservative writer August von Kotzebue by the Jena student Karl Ludwig Sand as a pretext, Metternich imposed the Karlsbad The exceptions were Prussia, Austria, Oldenburg and Hesse-Homburg. 1 0 2The most thorough account of the revolutionary upheavals in these years can be found in Karl Wegert, German Radicals Confront the Common People: Revolutionary Politics and Popular Politics 1789-1849 (Mainz: Verlag Philipp von Zabern, 1992). 103Discontent in the universities was also fueled by the fact that the number of job opportunities for the university-educated population was declining. John Toews notes that "[advancement from the status of unsalaried lecturer (Privatdozent) to a fully salaried chair (Ordinarius) was slow and difficult in the best of times. Between 1815 and 1848 the average age of habilitation as a Privatdozent was twenty-six; the average age at which the security of an Ordinarius was achieved was thirty-five. Just as in the judicial and administrative hierarchies, there was a long wait in poverty and insecurity before one could hope to attain social and financial security. During the 1830s this situation became considerably worse." John E. Toews, Hegelianism: The Path Toward Dialectical Humanism, 1805-1841 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1980), 215. 36 Resolutions on the German Confederation. The Karlsbad legislation provided for closer supervision of the universities and tighter regulation of the press through the creation of a central commission that was charged with the co-ordination and enforcement of censorship throughout the Confederation. The Karlsbad Resolutions also included the Untersuchungsgesetz which established the Centralbehdrde zur ndhern Untersuchung der in mehreren Bundesstaaten entdeckten revolutiondren Umtriebe, otherwise known as the Mainz Central Investigating Commission, which included representatives from Prussia, Bavaria, Austria, Hanover, Baden, Hesse and Nassau. 1 0 4 In spite of attempts by the Diet to hold the Commission answerable for its activities, it nonetheless enjoyed more or less independent power. Working with the local police forces, the commission scrutinized and condemned the activities of hundreds of Germans, including Fichte, Jahn, Hardenberg and Stein, in the five years of its existence.105 Though the Karlsbad Resolutions were supposed to end in 1824, the restrictions on the universities and the censorship provisions effectively remained in place until 1848. The repressive programme contained in the Karlsbad Resolutions was further underscored by the Wiener Schlufiakte which was passed in July 1820. The Schlufiakte revised the Bundesakte of 1815, removing any of the progressive impulses contained in the original charter. Article Twenty-Six authorized the Confederation to intervene in a state's domestic affairs i f this was deemed necessary for the preservation of the order of the Confederation. 1 0 4 Ludwig Bentfeldt, Der deutsche Bund als nationales Band 1815-1866 (Zurich: Musterschmidt, 1985), 106; see Appendix A(ii) for the text of the Karlsbad Resolutions. l05Ibid., 108. 37 Article Fifty-Eight limited the ability of state leaders to agree to a constitution that might limit or obstruct their ability to carry out their duties to the Confederation and Article Fifty-Nine warned that the proceedings of any individual Bundestag would not be permitted to threaten the domestic order of any individual state or the Confederation as a whole. Finally, since there had been no progress on a uniform press law or on questions of religious freedom, Article Sixty-Five established that additional discussion of these issues would be postponed indefinitely.106 Wegert concludes that the measures instituted after the murder of Kotzebue made it so difficult for radicals to remain undetected that from 1819 to 1829 Germany remained quiet.1 0 7 Among German writers and intellectuals the 1820s saw very strong anti-French sentiments re-emerge, accompanied by a return to more traditional conceptions of the Germanic state. Schulze notes that Baron vom Stein 1 0 8 demanded that the constitution of the Peace of Westphalia be replaced by a renewed medieval Empire. The celebration of the Germanic past continued with vom Stein's Monumenta Germaniae Historica, Heinrich Luden's Geschichte des deutschen Volkes,109 and Friedrich von Raumer's Geschichte der mIbid., 37-51; see Appendix A(iii). 107Wegert, German Radicals Confront, 101. 1 0 8Baron Heinrich Friedrich Karl vom und zum Stein (1757-1831) sponsor of the Monumenta Germaniae Historica was better known for the series of reforms which he put in place in Prussia between 1807 and 1810, including the Edict of 1807 which abolished serfdom and the estate system, ended the restrictions that kept nobles from selling their land to the middle class, and opened trades and professions to all classes. 1 0 9Heinrich Luden (1780-1847) was a Jena historian whose works included Allgemeine Geschichte der Volker und Staaten des Altertums (1814) and Allgemeine Geschichte der 38 Hohenstaufen. A l l of these writers celebrated both the uniqueness and the greatness of Germanic culture and reminded their readers of past triumphs. As far as many German writers were concerned the most oppressive aspect of the post-1819 reaction was the system of censorship which was established as a result of the Karlsbad Resolutions. Though the uniform press law envisioned in Article 18d. of the Bundesakte had been intended to protect freedom of the press and the rights of authors and publishers, this was quickly twisted into a censorship law. At this time there was a clear belief on both sides of the political spectrum that the power of the written word was immense. Thus, in order to contain the potentially disruptive power of writers and journalists, the Prussian censorship law, established on 18 October, 1819, decreed that all publications with fewer than twenty folio sheets (equal to 320 pages) published anywhere within the German territories must be submitted to a preventive censor, prior to publication. This became known as the Vorzensur.in The same law also created a higher authority known as the Ober-Zensur, which retained final executive and judicial authority over all censorship decisions. Local police forces were used to Vblker und Staaten des Mittelalters (1821-1822), as well as the twelve volume Geschichte des deutschen Volkes (1825-1832). 1 1 0Friedrich von Raumer (1781-1873) was a professor at the University of Berlin; his works included Vorlesungen iiber die alte Geschichte (1821) and Polens Untergang (1832). Both Theodor Mundt and Karl Gutzkow studied with Raumer. i nSeveral writers were forced to resort to extraordinary measures in an attempt to evade the Vorzensur. By publishing volumes two and three of his Reisebilder simultaneously, Heine managed to avoid the Vorzensur by exceeding the 320 page limit. Likewise Gutzkow appended an article entitled "Wahrheit und Wirklichkeit" to Wally, die Zweiflerin in part to ensure that the novel surpassed the Vorzensur's page limit. 39 enforce the edicts of the Ober-Zensur112 With this edict the greater part of the German book industry and all newspapers and journals were subjected to official scrutiny and possible censorship. In order to enforce this law a censorship apparatus was established in thirty-six of the thirty-nine territories of the German Confederation—though the Constitutional states such as Baden and Hesse-Darmstadt were somewhat less rigorous in enforcing the censorship laws. 1 1 3 The senates of the three free cities of Frankfurt, Hamburg and Bremen argued successfully for the maintenance of their sovereignty in matters of censorship, and thereby avoided the most draconian of the Prussian and Austrian decrees.114 More troublesome for writers and publishers than the Vorzensur was the second level of censorship, the Nachzensur, which was directed against editors and publishers of offending Though the legislation which created the censorship apparatus was Prussian, and the Ober-Zensur answered to the Prussian Interior Ministry, the Ober-Zensur had executive and judicial authority in every state of the German confederation. 1 1 3 Udo Koster, Literarischer Radikalismus. Zeitbewufitsein und Geschichtsphilosophie in der Entwicklung vom Jungen Deutschland zur Hegelischen Linken (Frankfurt: 1972J, 57ff; Baden's reputation for more liberal application of the censorship decrees did nothing to save the Young Germans in 1835, as Baden banned the publication of all works by the authors named in the Prussian edict a mere twenty-eight days after the ruling by the Prussian censor. It was Baden where Gutzkow was finally imprisoned on 30 November, 1835. 1 1 4Gutzkow was so certain of the liberal censorship laws in Frankfurt that he chose that city as the base for the proposed publication of Deutsche Revue, in a letter to a Mannheim publisher Heinrich Hoff, Gutzkow wrote: "[Es] kommt dazu, dB ich in Frankft. mit der Censur auf gutem FuB stehe, u recht gut weiB, was man bieten kann." Gutzkow to Heinrich Hoff, Stuttgart 27.8.35. BdfG, 151 (these abbreviations appear in the original letter). For a time the Bundestag of Wurttemberg was also able to retain some independence over its press laws. However, a showdown between the Wurttemberg representative Freiherr von Wangenheim and the Bundesversammlung eventually led to the defeat of the former and the restriction of Wurttemberg's press law. See Bentfeldt, Der deutsche Bund, 113-126. 40 material. Should a book or journal be banned after publication the entire publishing run could be seized at a considerable loss to the publishing house in question. While ordinarily a single quarrel with the censor would not have any significant repercussions, multiple infringements of the 1819 laws could result in a ban against the entire publishing house. Karl Gutzkow's publisher Carl Lowenthal suffered this fate in the mid-1830s115 and Heine's publisher Campe resorted to editing Heine's works in 1841 rather than face the wrath of the Nachzensur116 Even during the height of the reaction, however, certain limited avenues remained open for the propagation of liberal and nationalist ideas. The censors were notoriously slow, due in large part to the enormous amount of material they were expected to process. The overwhelming amount of material led the censors to impose an arbitrary limit of twenty pages, below which the censor would not usually review the material. Thus much of the work by liberal and radical authors was published in newspapers, journals and other media carefully designed to evade the twenty page limit. A growing rate of adult literacy1 1 7 and the proliferation of reading circles also ensured that new ideas reached a broader audience than ever before. There was also more to read than at any previous time: the number of books and 1 1 5See Appendix A(i) for the ruling of the censor against Carl Lowenthal. 1 1 6Campe had already been warned in 1835 that his affiliation with Heine was placing his publishing house in a dangerous position. The text of the Hamburg ban against the Young Germans ordered that "Die Regierung der freien Stadt Hamburg wird aufgefordet, in dieser Beziehung insbesondere der Hoffmann- und Campe'schen Buchhandlung zu Hamburg, welche vorzugsweise Schriften obiger Art in Verlag und Vertrieb hat, die geeignete Verwarnung zu gehen zu lassen." Houben, Zeitschriften des Jungen Deutschlands, Bd. 1, 439. 117Estimated at 40% by 1830; Hagen Schulze, The Course of German Nationalism: From Frederick the Great to Bismarck 1763-1867 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991), 59. 41 newspapers available more than doubled between the years 1820 and 1850. These complementary developments prompted Robert Prutz, a leading Vormdrz literary critic to comment that "[i]n the bleak period of the twenties, the heyday of the restoration, it was [literature] that primarily, if not exclusively, kept alive the patriotic hopes of the nation and sparked some kind of public life." 1 1 8 The hopes that had been nourished by literature and journalism were further boosted by the outbreak of revolutionary activity in 1830. In July 1830 Parisian workers, impoverished by rising food prices, took to the streets protesting the cost of living, the hoarding of grain by merchants and unfair taxes. The Bourbon regime of Charles X collapsed and the King fled to England. After several weeks of indecision among the rebels the due d'Orleans took the throne as Louis-Philippe, king of the French. The disturbances in France spread quickly throughout Europe. In the North the Belgian provinces revolted against the Netherlands in August 1830. The Belgians demanded their own state, a concession which would have fundamentally violated the territorial settlement established at Vienna. However, the great powers were eventually convinced to accept an independent Belgium on the condition that it remain a neutral nation. In the East a revolt began in Warsaw in November 1830. Polish army cadets and students demanded a constitution and freedom from their Russian overlords. Landed aristocrats and members of the gentry joined in the revolutionary cause and established a provisional government. However, indecision over the nature of the reform programme split the government and the Russians intervened to crush the rebellion. In the south the Greeks 1 1 8Robert Prutz, Vorlesungen iiber die deutsche Literatur der Gegenwart (Leipzig: 1847), 329; quoted in English in Hohendahl, Building a National Literature, 107. 42 mounted an independence struggle against their Ottoman overlords. Seeing an effort to gain influence in the area Russia declared war on Turkey, an event which aroused Metternich's suspicions regarding Russia's territorial ambitions. Of even greater concern to Metternich were the activities in the Italian states of Parma and Modena. In February 1831 Italian nationalists rose up against Austrian rule. Though the revolutionaries were ineffective against the powerful Austrian army, the nationalist and republican ambitions which had motivated the rebels were kept alive in the Young Italy movement, founded in exile in 1832 under the leadership of the exiled Giuseppe Mazzini (1805-1872).119 In Germany the repercussions of the July Revolution once again brought questions of emancipation, liberalism and revolution to the forefront of public consciousness. Leonard Krieger sees the period which began in 1830 as "the decisive conflict and the denouement in the history of the modern state in Germany."120 Krieger argues that the revolution was the catalyst which transferred the fight for liberal principles from official institutions to citizen groups. However, these groups were extremely diverse in their goals and tactics; some liberal supporters advocated constitutional reform while others attempted to foster direct political action. At the same time Krieger believes that an intellectual liberal movement emerged independent of this uncoordinated mass action, and the forces of bureaucratic liberalism were In 1834 exiled members of Young Italy who had taken refuge in Bern, Switzerland founded a new movement which was variously called 'das junge Deutschland' or 'das junge Europa.' 1 2 0Leonard Krieger, The German Conception of Freedom: History of a Political Tradition (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1957), 275. 43 also strengthened. The July Revolution also led some territories, especially Baden and Bavaria, to ease censorship restrictions which in turn brought about an invigoration of political life. Hagen Schulze argues that in Germany the July Revolution also reinvigorated the debate over nationhood.122 Schulze agrees with Krieger that the Revolution was vitally important in enlivening the struggle for liberal principles, but goes on to argue that "freedom in the liberal sense, unity in the national sense... were the ideologies which permeated collective views of the world and carried the promise of future felicity."1 2 3 Schulze believes that, in Germany, the liberal, constitutional and social currents of the time were all pursuing the national principle. The most significant demonstration of popular agitation in the German states came in May 1832 when the German Press and Fatherland Association held an open celebration of the proclamation of the first Bavarian constitution at SchloB Hambach. The gathering included representatives of liberal, democratic and constitutionalist organizations, all of whom expressed their dissatisfaction with the existing state of affairs in the German Confederation.124 The response of the federal authorities to the Hambach festival was predictable. The restrictive ulIbid., 278-280. 1 2 2Schulze, The Course of German Nationalism, 60. mIbid., 61. 1 2 4Wegert offers a convincing argument that the Hambach Festival was far less coherent than the authorities perceived. The radicals were not destroyers of the traditional order; rather, they simply wished to eliminate the existing restrictions on free thought and to educate the common people regarding the sources of their discontent. The common people meanwhile viewed the Hambach festival as a community celebration rather than a radical protest against the status quo. Wegert, German Radicals Confront, 144-171. 44 measures established by the Karlsbad resolutions had already been extended indefinitely in September 1830. In addition, the Federal Diet introduced a series of regulations for the maintenance of peace and order in June and July 1832. On June 28 the Diet reaffirmed monarchical authority and established a commission to ensure that the German states would conform and on July 5 it underscored the existing rules on censorship and limited the public activities of political organizations. Finally, in June 1833 the Diet authorized the creation of the Bundes-Zentralbehdrde in Frankfurt, a centralized bureau of police investigation. During the next nine years the Bureau investigated some 2000 suspicious individuals.125 During this period of repression many of the states also strengthened their defences against radical activity. In Bavaria 8500 troops were despatched to identify and control revolutionary groups and in Baden the liberal press law which had made that state a safe haven for many radicals was struck down. The reaction in Hesse-Kassel, Hanover and Saxony was even stronger.126 James Sheehan notes, however, that the reaction to the revolutionary upheavals of 1830 was at best incomplete. The proliferation of radical books, periodicals and newspapers defeated the best efforts of the censors, and meanwhile social clubs and cultural organizations became open forums for political discussions.127 On April 3, 1833 a small group of former Burschenschaftler attempted to seize control of the city of Frankfurt in the so-called Wachensturm, intending to provoke a wider revolution. The revolution was not forthcoming 125Bentfeldt, Der deutsche Bund, 233. 126Sheehan, Germany 1770-1866, 614. niIbid., 614-615. 45 but in May 1833 there was renewed unrest in the Palatinate on the anniversary of the Hambach Festival. By the end of 1834 the few Frankfurt rebels who had avoided prosecution formed the Union, an association dedicated to mobilizing the German working class. Thus the energies unleashed by the revolutions of 1830 were not easily contained. 4. The wave of protest which swept Germany in the early 1830s was sustained by the activities of several literary groups. 'Young Germany' was one such group. Drawing upon many of the ideas of 1830 and taking advantage of the various opportunities to evade the reactionary measures instituted by Metternich, the so-called Young Germans were able to produce an immense body of work between 1830 and 1835. Gutzkow, Laube, Mundt and Wienbarg were prolific writers, contributing to a variety of literary journals and daily newspapers, while simultaneously producing a substantial body of literature, including both novels and factual or semi-fictional essays.128 Karl Gutzkow was the most prolific of the Young Germans. As Sammons observed, "I cannot imagine that anyone who ever lived has read his complete works, not even the indefatigable Houben." 1 2 9 Gutzkow was born in Berlin on March 17, 1811. His father was a civilian employee in the Prussian ministry of war whose income allowed Gutzkow to attend a prestigious gymnasium. During this time he was also able to travel and write extensively and he 1 2 8Though this study is only concerned with the activities of the so-called Young Germans prior to 1835, the following biographical sketches cover the entire lives of these writers in order to provide a sense of the fate of these men after the ban. 129Sammons, Six Essays, 31. 46 became fascinated with the works of Novalis and Jean Paul. At the beginning of 1829 Gutzkow entered the University of Berlin which was dominated at that time by the presence of G.W.F. Hegel (1770-1831) and Friedrich Schleiermacher (1768-1834).130 By 1829 the Philosophical Faculty was divided into two conflicting schools of thought: the "philosophical" party which was loyal to Hegel's teachings and the "Historical School" which had coalesced around Schleiermacher and Barthold Niebuhr (1776-1831). The two groups differed over several key issues but the most important division concerned the nature of the state. John Toews notes that [w]hereas Hegel believed that the rational structure of the modern state was the sphere in which the conflicts of bourgeois society were reconciled and the ideal of ethical life finally actualized, Schleiermacher saw the state simply as the external organizational form of the organic communality of a people (Volk) sharing the same language and cultural traditions.131 Though Gutzkow briefly entered the Theological Faculty; the greater part of his education was completed in the Philosophical Faculty. 1 3 2 During his attendance at Berlin Gutzkow heard lectures by representatives of both major schools of thought: Hegel, Schleiermacher, the The brief educational synopses which follow are drawn primarily from Houben, Jungdeutscher Sturm und Drang; Wulfing, Junges Deutschland; and Walter Dietze, Junges Deutschland und deutsche Klassik. 1 3 1Toews, Hegelianism, 57. 1 3 2The shift from theology to philosophy was a common path taken by many students and academics during this period. As theology became more dogmatic and increasingly less able to accommodate itself to a changing world, scholars looked to philosophy to provide the 'truths' which they had previously sought in religion. Ultimately the notion of philosophy as autonomous and authoritative would be undermined by the theory of ideology which appeared in the 1840s. According to this theory philosophy itself was dependent on social and political conditions. On this topic see Harold Mah, The End of Philosophy and the Origin of "Ideology. " Karl Marx and the Crisis of the Young Hegelians (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1987), especially 1-19. 47 Church historian Johann August Wilhelm Neander (1789-1850), the historian Friedrich von Raumer (1781-1873), the philologist August Boeckh (1785-1867) and the geographer Karl Ritter (1779-1859). Gutzkow excelled in Latin and was fascinated by ancient history as well as old Germanic literature. During this period he was clearly drawn to the Hegelian group and on August 3, 1830 Hegel personally awarded Gutzkow a Philosophical Faculty prize for an essay on ancient conceptions of fate. Gutzkow's continuing interest in antiquity and his mastery of Latin led eventually to his Jena doctoral thesis, De diis fatalibus. At the age of twenty Gutzkow left the academic world and under the guidance of Wolfgang Menzel founded the Forum der Journalliteratur.133 Subsequently he worked with Menzel on the Morgenblatt fur gebildete Stdnde, a journal which was inspired by and dedicated to Heinrich Heine and Ludwig Borne. In 1832 Gutzkow published his first novella Briefe eines Narren an eine Ndrrin which attracted considerable attention. In the same year he published his first scarcely-concealed attack on his former mentor, Menzel, in the short yet controversial "Divination auf den nachsten wurttembergischen Landtag." In 1833 he published another novella, Maha Guru, Geschichte eines Gottes. The year 1835 was Gutzkow's most prolific period. In January he assumed the position of editor and chief contributor to the Literaturblatt supplement of Phonix: Friihlingszeitung fur Deutschland, a position which he held until August 22 of that year. During that year he also 1 3 3 B y the 1830s securing an academic career was virtually impossible. The budget of the University of Berlin was fixed in 1830 so that any new appointment meant a salary reduction for existing faculty. The number of Privatdozenten increased enormously but the chance of gaining a permanent position at any university in the German states was virtually nil. John Toews notes that the socio-economic situation was a significant factor in the transformation of many intellectuals into radical cultural critics; Toews, Hegelianism, 216. 48 wrote an introduction to a new edition of Friedrich Schlegel's Lucinde. Gutzkow's introduction focussed not on Lucinde itself, but rather on Friedrich Schleiermacher's "Vertraute Briefe," an earlier commentary on Schlegel's work. Later in 1835 Gutzkow's first full-length novel, Wally, die Zweiflerin, was published. Essentially a novel about one woman's battle with religious doubt, Wally was the most contentious of the so-called Young German writings and the direct cause of the Federal ban of 1835. Wally was published in mid-August 1835.1 3 4 At twenty folio sheets long the work had been able to evade the office of the Vorzensur. However, subsequent reviews and a vitriolic exchange between Gutzkow and Wolfgang Menzel brought the work to the attention of the Ober-Zensur in Berlin. The Ober-Zensur ruled on September 18 that the novel could no longer be sold in Prussia. On September 22 the novel was banned entirely in Prussia and by October 20 the state of Baden had also indicated its disapproval of the work. On October 27 legal proceedings were instituted against Gutzkow and Lowenthal at the high court in Mannheim. The issue was brought to Metternich's attention on October 31, 1835 by the chief of political police Wilhelm von Wittgenstein.135 On November 1 Wally was confiscated in Kurhessen and on November 14 in Mannheim, though evidently by the 14th Carl Lowenthal had only two copies of the work, from the original printing of 800, left unsold. Also on November 14th 1 3 4August 12 or 16. Ruth-Ellen Boetcher-Joeres' notes that there was some confusion regarding the date of publication; Ruth-Ellen Boetcher-Joeres, "Introduction," to Karl Gutzkow, Wally, the Skeptic, transl. Ruth-Ellen Boetcher-Joeres (Frankfurt am Main: Herbert Lang, 1974), 19. Houben reports that Wally was published on August 12. Houben, Verbotene Literatur von der Klassischen Zeit, 262-263. 1 3 5Houben, Jungdeutscher Sturm und Drang, 58. 49 Prussia imposed a formal edict of suppression on the work. On November 24th Gutzkow's application for a residency permit in Frankfurt was withdrawn and three days later a preliminary hearing determined that Gutzkow and Lowenthal would be charged with derision of the Christian faith and Church. On November 30 a warrant was issued for Gutzkow's arrest and he was imprisoned in Baden until his trial began on January 8, 1836. On January 13 a Mannheim tribunal found Gutzkow guilty of defaming the Christian religion. He was sentenced to an additional four weeks in prison, over and above the time he had served while awaiting trial and was also ordered to pay one third of the trial costs. Immediately prior to the ban Gutzkow had begun a collaborative venture with Ludolf Wienbarg which was to have led to the publication of a new literary journal, Deutsche Revue, in January 1836. However, the ban and Gutzkow's subsequent imprisonment prevented the publication of this journal. Following the ban Gutzkow published a highly edited collection of his writings under the title Beitrdge zur Geschichte der neuesten Literatur in 1836. Thereafter he returned briefly to work on literary journals but frustration with the censor eventually led him to concentrate on novels and plays. In 1837 he published Seraphine and in 1838 the satirical three volume Blasedow und seine Sdhne. After this novel, Gutzkow turned his hand to play-writing with "Konig Saul" in 1839, "Richard Savage oder der Sohn einer Mutter" in 1842, "Zopf und Schwert" in 1844 and "Das Urbild des Tartuffe" in 1847. In 1848 Gutzkow was a member of the Committee of Conciliation and wrote two pamphlets which discussed the ideas of freedom and unity. 1 3 6 However, under the direction of Count Arnim-Boytzenburg and 136Published collectively: Karl Gutzkow, Deutschland am Vorabend seines Falles oder seiner Grofie (Frarikfurt: C. Lowenthal, 1848). 50 Prince Lichnowsky Gutzkow also delivered a pacifying speech to the masses, urging them not to take drastic action. 1 3 7 After the events of 1848, Gutzkow returned to the creation of novels, the most important of which appeared between 1850 and 1861: Der Ritter vom Geiste (1850/51) and Der Zauberer von Rom (1858-1861). Also during this period Gutzkow produced the first of two autobiographical works, Aus der Knabenzeit (1852). Gutzkow had created a legion of enemies both during and after his involvement with the Young Germans and eventually fell prey to feelings of paranoia. An unsuccessful suicide attempt in 1865 intensified his delusions though he continued to write. During this period Gutzkow produced his autobiography, Ruckblicke auf mein Leben (1875). Gutzkow died on December 16, 1878, burned to death during a fire at his home. Theodor Mundt was born in Potsdam on September 19, 1808 the son of a civil servant. He was raised in Berlin and, like Gutzkow, attended the University of Berlin though he first entered the Law Faculty in 1825 before moving to Philosophy in May 1826. Mundt and Gutzkow shared many of the same lecturers including Raumer, Ritter and Boeckh. Mundt was also a student of Hegel, studying logic, natural philosophy and the history of philosophy with Hegel during the winter of 1827/28. Wolfing notes, however, that Mundt was the first of the so-called Young Germans to distance himself from Hegel in 1832.1 3 8 Mundt's academic career 1 3 7Ernest K . Bramsted, Aristocracy and the Middle Classes in Germany: Social Types in German Literature 1830-1900, rev. ed. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1964), 79. 1 3 8Wulfing, Junges Deutschland, 131. Mundt also claimed to have studied metaphysics and aesthetics with Hegel in the summer of 1826 but Walter Dietze was unable to substantiate this claim. Dietze, Junges Deutschland und Deutsche Klassik, 137. Despite Mundt's desire to break free of the Hegelian influence, it remained prominent in much of his subsequent work. 51 concluded with his doctoral studies at Erlangen and a dissertation on ancient rhetoric. During his years as a student Mundt wrote for several newspapers—both liberal and more conservative publications. From 1830 to 1833 Mundt edited the Blatter fur literarische Unterhaltung and also wrote several short novellas including, "Der Basilisk, oder Gesichterstudien" and "Madelon." In 1834 Mundt produced his first full-length novel, Moderne Lebenswirren, which was followed in 1835 by the publication of a second full-length monograph entitled Madonna: Unterhaltungen mit einer Heiligen and the highly provocative piece Charlotte Stieglitz: Ein Denkmal. The latter was a tribute to the wife of Heinrich Stieglitz, whose suicide had deeply affected Mundt, Gutzkow and the others. Also in 1835 Mundt became editor of Literarischer Zodiacus and evidently became fascinated with the proposed collaboration of Gutzkow and Wienbarg on the Deutsche Revue. Mundt contacted Gutzkow during this period about the possibility of a meeting early in the new year to discuss the creation of a more formal structure within which the three men would operate. These plans, however, were terminated by the Reichstag decree. Immediately after the appearance of the Reichstag ban an embittered Mundt attempted to distance himself as far as possible from the others. Mundt did receive some recognition for his earlier work as a Young German in 1848 when he was briefly named to the post of extraordinary professor of language and literary history at Breslau. This position did not survive the retrenchment of 1849, however, and soon Mundt was able only to secure work as a librarian in Berlin. Mundt died on November 30, 1861. Christian Ludolf Wienbarg was born on Christmas Day, 1802, in Altona, the son of a blacksmith. Whereas Mundt and Gutzkow were at the centre of many of the great theological 52 and philosophical debates of their day by virtue of their attendance at the University of Berlin, Wienbarg was somewhat removed from the great scholars. His mother's insistence that he study theology led him to the University of Kiel, but his study of Schleiermacher eventually shifted his interest from theology to philosophy.139 After serving briefly as a private tutor, Wienbarg moved to Bonn in 1828 where he became interested in Greek philosophy and art, in particular the works of Plato and Aristotle. In an autobiographical essay Wienbarg claimed that he was able to hear lectures by August Schlegel (1767-1845) and Barthold Niebuhr (1776-1831) during this period. However, Houben notes that there is some doubt concerning this chronology of events.140 By 1829 Wienbarg moved to Marburg where he submitted his doctoral dissertation: De primitivo idearum Platonicarum sensu. Following the completion of his dissertation Wienbarg settled in Hamburg where he met Heinrich Heine and briefly joined the circle of writers who had congregated around Heine. Houben notes that Wienbarg was already familiar with Heine's travelogues but this period of personal contact between the two men was vital in shaping Wienbarg's style and interests.141 A brief career as a private tutor in Holland produced the travel novella Holland in den Jahren 1831 und 1832, written in the style of Heine's Reisebilder. Wienbarg returned to his studies at Kiel in 1833. As a Privatdozent he lectured on Gothic and Middle-High German 1 3 9Wienbarg was unable to hear Schleiermacher speak in person but in 1830 he did send him a copy of his dissertation and a sonnet which he had composed as an expression of gratitude for the profound influence which Schleiermacher had exerted upon him. Houben, Jungdeutscher Sturm und Drang, 236. l40lbid., 224-234. 1 4 1 For his part Heine considered Wienbarg a "sehr geistreichen Mann." Ibid., 180. 53 literature as well as the history of German literature. Asthetische Feldzuge (1834), Wienbarg's most important work, was drawn from twenty-four lectures which he gave during this period. In this book Wienbarg called for a new political and functional literature, spear-headed by Germany's young writers, which would revolutionize the role of literature in society. In 1835 Wienbarg published two collections of his most important essays. The first, Zur neuesten Literatur, included essays on Heine and Gutzkow. The second collection, Wanderungen durch den Thierkreis, was a more thoughtful work concerned with such issues as religious change and the dangers of autocracy. In the same year, Wienbarg moved to Frankfurt in order to begin his collaboration with Gutzkow on the ill-fated Deutsche Revue. After the ban Wienbarg returned eventually to Hamburg to work on several different newspapers including the Hamburger Neue Zeitung and Borsen-Halle, the Altona Merkur and the Deutsches Literaturblatt. Though Wienbarg did find work following the ban its impact was devastating as far as his creativity was concerned. In 1838 Wienbarg produced a new novella, Tagebuch von Helgoland, but it lacked the vigour and confidence of his earlier works and following a brief period as editor of the Deutsches Literaturblatt from 1840 to 1842, Wienbarg faded gradually into obscurity. In the years surrounding the Revolutions of 1848, he returned briefly to the public stage as he became deeply involved in the Schleswig-Holstein question. Wienbarg fought briefly against Denmark with one of the Freikorps units, but his major contribution to the cause came from his meticulous chronicling of the region's history. Between 1846 and 1851 he published six treatises on the Schleswig-Holstein issue, including the three volume Darstellungen aus den schleswig-holsteinischen Feldziigen (1850/1851). However, with the failure of 1848 Wienbarg returned once again to private life. By the mid-54 1850s a severe battle with alcoholism combined with early signs of mental illness to create a persecution complex. In 1869 Wienbarg was committed to an asylum where he died on January 2, 1872. Heinrich Laube was the best-known literary critic of the group and the only Young German to enjoy a relatively successful career following the Reichstag ban. Laube was born on September 18, 1806 in Sprottau, Silesia, son of a master stone-mason. Like Gutzkow and Wienbarg, Laube began his university education intending to study theology. He therefore chose to attend the University of Halle 1 4 2 as its Theological Faculty was the largest school of divinity in the German states. During Laube's time at Halle the university was the site of an intense theological conflict between the Halle Pietists and Protestant Rationalists, over the true nature of Christ. 1 4 3 The rancour generated by this debate seemed to many, including Laube, to reflect all that was wrong with contemporary Christianity. Eventually his study of evangelical theology and the history of biblical criticism alienated him from theology and led him into philosophy. By the time he moved to the University of Breslau in the Winter of 1827/28 Laube had largely abandoned theology for philosophy, under the tutelage of the philosopher Heinrich 1 4 2Halle was originally founded as a refuge for Philipp Jacob Spener and his Pietist movement. Spener had established the university and its surrounding institutions, including a pauper school and an orphanage, after being offered refuge in Brandenburg by Friedrich III. Friedrich Schleiermacher was a Halle alumnus. 1 4 3The Pietists believed that Christ was a real historical figure whose activities were recorded in the New Testament; the Rationalists argued (following the line established by Voltaire) that Christ was merely a philosophical entity who provided guidelines for ethical behaviour. 55 Steffens (1773-1845). Laube gained a peripheral awareness of Hegel's work during his years at Breslau but his knowledge of Hegelian philosophy remained limited. In 1829 Laube returned to the theological debate concerning the doctrine of original sin but as Houben notes his interest in theology had more or less waned by this point.1 4 5 The revolutions of 1830 completed the break with theology and thereafter Laube devoted himself exclusively to the concrete political and social questions of his day. Unlike the other Young Germans Laube was very active in the activities of the Burschenschaften both at Halle and Breslau. 1 4 6 In the summer of 1826 Laube travelled to Freiburg and was able to meet with Friedrich Jahn (1778-1852) the founder of the gymnastics societies. Soon after he allied himself with the Armine Party which called for an idealistic form of Germanic unity based on Christian premises. His move to Breslau in 1827 brought him into contact with another of the Burschenschaften: the 'Alten Breslauer Burschenschaft der Raczeks.' Though he did not become a formal member of this society he did help them secure funding, as well as establishing and editing a newspaper for them. 1 4 7 In 1832 Laube became the in-house literary critic for the Leipziger Tageblatt and the 144Steffens had been an early supporter of the Burschenschaften in the years prior to the Wartburg festival of 1817. His philosophical teachings emphasized the visionary philosophy of Schelling, an influence which would feature prominently in Laube's work. Nipperdey, Germany from Napoleon to Bismarck, 244. 1 4 5Houben, Jungdeutscher Sturm und Drang, 258. 1 4 6Wulfing notes that Gutzkow and Wienbarg were interested in the activities of the Burschenschaften but Laube's involvement was much more significant. Wiilfing, Junges Deutschland, 141-142 & 149. 1 4 7This was Aurora: eine literarische Zeitschrift. 56 Blatter fur literarische Unterhaltung. Around the same time Laube became the editor of the Zeitung fur die elegante Welt. His first connection to the other Young Germans came as he travelled in Austria and Italy in 1833 at which time he met Karl Gutzkow and agreed to collaborate with Gutzkow and Wienbarg on the Zeitung fur die elegante Welt. However, this collaboration never took place, likely because of Gutzkow's subsequent attacks on Laube's work. During this period Laube also began an active correspondence with Heinrich Heine, making him the only one of the Young Germans to have ongoing contact with Heine. Laube's most significant works were published during the years 1833 and 1834, beginning with the publication of Das neue Jahrhundert which had been planned as a trilogy though only two volumes, Polen and Politische Briefe, were published. The third volume was to have been an account of the Saint-Simonians, but Laube never completed the work. 1 4 8 Laube next wrote a new trilogy entitled Das junge Europa. Of the three volumes only the first, Die Poeten, was completed prior to the ban. Official censure against Laube began well before the 1835 Federal proscription of Young Germany. Laube's early involvement with the Burschenschaften came to the attention of the police in late 1833. In May 1834 Laube, who was a Prussian subject, was notified that a decree of banishment had been issued and he had to leave Leipzig within a month. He thus left Leipzig bound for Berlin on May 10, 1834. After an ill-fated attempt to flee Prussia on the advice of Varnhagen von Ense, Laube was arrested on July 26. Six weeks of interrogation in the hands of the city authorities was followed by much 1 4 8 In 1835 Laube published Liebesbriefe (Leipzig: Otto Wigand, 1835) a novel which was based on Saint-Simonian principles, much as Die Poeten was, but this was not the promised analytical study of the movement. 57 harsher treatment in the hands of the federal police. Laube finally confessed his membership in the Burschenschaften in September 1834 but maintained that his loyalty to the state was unquestionable. With an unspecified sentence hanging over his head Laube published Liebesbriefe and Moderne Charakteristiken in 1835, as well as continuing to publish the multi-volume Reisenovellen (1834-1837). The threat of lengthy imprisonment removed much of Laube's revolutionary zeal and after 1836 Laube began to disassociate himself completely from Gutzkow and Wienbarg. In 1836 Laube was finally sentenced to a total of seven years in prison, the longest sentence given to any of the so-called Young Germans. This sentence was later commuted to eighteen months of house arrest under the watchful eye of Hermann Furst von Piickler-Muskau, during which time Laube wrote Geschichte der deutschen Literatur and the final two volumes of Das junge Europa: Die Krieger and Die Burger. In 1843 Laube returned to the Zeitung fur die elegante Welt as its theatre critic. He played an active role in the revolution of 1848 and was elected to the Paulskirche parliament during the early months of the revolution. After 1848, however, he again left politics, and from 1849 until 1867 Laube served as the director of the Vienna Burgtheater. Thereafter he was involved in the founding of the Vienna Stadttheater, and served as its director until his death on August 1, 1884. In summarizing the formative influences on the Young Germans many common themes emerge. Several of the so-called Young Germans were originally interested in the ancient world. Gutzkow, Laube and Wienbarg were planning to study theology but later chose to focus on philosophy. Through their interest in philosophy all came into contact with the work of G.W.F. Hegel and the teachings of Friedrich Schleiermacher. The 'Young Germans' were also 58 drawn to the study of literature, both ancient and modern. Finally, all were forced to leave the academic world by the socio-economic conditions of the early 1830s, a fact which instilled in them a determination to change those conditions. 5. As the biographical sketches above indicate, despite all of the official and unofficial obstacles facing the writers of 'Young Germany,' Gutzkow, Wienbarg, Mundt and Laube managed to publish an enormous amount of material in the years immediately preceding the ban. From this considerable volume of work, this study will focus on two major sources of information. Their numerous novels and treatises provide the clearest insight into what has been called the Young German programme. Each of the authors produced a substantial number of monographs. Of particular interest to this study are four works which seem to represent best the thought of each man: Gutzkow's Wally: die Zweiflerin; Laube's Das junge Europa, Mundt's Madonna: Unterhaltungen mit einer Heiligen; and Wienbarg's Asthetische Feldzuge In addition to these works, this study will make use of several lesser known novels and collections of essays in order to provide a complete analysis of the range of each man's interests, as well as the widely divergent approaches that the 'Young Germans' utilized. While the novels, treatises, and essay collections are useful in identifying the wide-ranging issues which preoccupied Gutzkow, Laube, Mundt and Wienbarg, considerable use will be made of the journalistic ventures of the four authors in order to trace as closely as possible the specific and changing nature of their beliefs and their methodological concerns. Since the Young Germans believed that literary criticism played a vital role in the transformation of society, their reviews of one another's works are particularly helpful in 59 establishing the fiindamental issues to which each man was committed. This study will therefore make use of the following: Heinrich Laube's work on the Zeitung fur die elegante Welt between 1833 and 1834; the work produced during Karl Gutzkow's tenure as editor of the Literaturblatt supplement to Phbnix: Friihlingszeitung fur Deutschland which covers a large part of 1835; Theodor Mundt's work on Literarischer Zodiacus which began in 1834 and continued through 1835; and finally, Ludolf Wienbarg's work on the Deutsche Revue and the Hamburg Borsen-Halle. 60 CHAPTER TWO: The Inter-Relationship among the Young Germans as Demonstrated in their Journalistic Work The so-called Young Germans were in complete agreement on only two issues. They were united in their attack on the Vormdrz state. In addition, as noted previously, there was also general agreement that it was possible to utilize both factual and fictional literature as a potent weapon in the fight against the old regime. For this belief the Young Germans were indebted to several prominent writers whose works had led to a fundamental break with romantic literary theory. As Peter Hohendahl has argued, the idealistic separation of art and politics which had characterized the romantic authors was shattered by the efforts of the literary avant-garde of the 1830s.149 The literary theorists of the 1830s expounded the notion that the purpose of art was to serve the political progress of humanity. Hohendahl notes that many literary theorists in the 1830s believed that "the literary movement was the avant-garde of the political and social movement."150 However, as soon as one moves from the general Vormdrz belief that literature could 1 4 9Peter Uwe Hohendahl, Building a National Literature: The Case of Germany 1830-1870, transl. Renate Baron Franciscono (Ithaca, N Y : Cornell University Press, 1989), 106-115. Hohendahl's study perpetuates the view that romantic literature was fundamentally apolitical, allowing the author to retreat from his frustrated political ambitions into an ideal world of the imagination. More recent works have argued that the early Romantics were deeply concerned with the condition of the real world and in fact viewed art as the key to the social and political regeneration of Germany. See Frederick C. Beiser, Enlightenment, Revolution and Romanticism: The Genesis of Modern German Political Thought, 1790-1800 (Cambridge, M A : Harvard University Press, 1992), 222-244. 150Hohendahl, Building a National Literature, 107. 61 serve as a vital weapon in the transformation of the socio-political sphere, to the specific means by which this would be achieved, very clear differences of opinion emerge among the 'Young German' authors. Though it might be argued that the polemical character of their literary projects and the need to compete for the allegiance of a relatively small audience made conflict an inescapable fact, the issues which divided the four men went far beyond simple clashes of ego. The root of the conflict among the men can be traced back to four very different sets of personal beliefs and objectives. One way to begin to unravel the ideas that motivated the so-called Young Germans is to examine the nature of the exchanges among them. By so doing, it will be possible to propose a basic outline of the problems which concerned each man, and it will also be possible to make a preliminary assessment of the major issues which divided the four writers who have been considered the nucleus of Young Germany. The lives of the individuals who made up Young Germany have been exhaustively documented; however, the relationship among the writers has remained virtually unexplored, largely due to its inordinate complexity. One must immediately confront the fact that there was only minimal personal contact between the authors, since each was based in a different city: Laube remained for the most part in Leipzig, Mundt in Berlin, Wienbarg in Kiel (though he moved to Frankfurt in 1835) and Gutzkow in Stuttgart, Mannheim and Frankfurt.151 In addition, a survey of Gutzkow's personal correspondence during the years 1830 to 1848 1 5 1Gutzkow's frequent relocation was a result of his continual search for a more receptive publisher. Hence he left Stuttgart when J.G. Cotta placed a number of restrictions on the publication of his works. Gutzkow attributed this to the fact that Cotta was dominated by Wolfgang Menzel. Frankfurt on the other hand was home to the more receptive J.D. Sauerlander publisher of Phonix. Mannheim was the location of Gutzkow's friend and most loyal publisher, Carl Lowenthal, who published the majority of his 1835 works. 62 reveals very little direct communication with the other so-called members of Young Germany.152 Finally, there was considerable personal animosity between Karl Gutzkow and most of the other writers, a fact which further limited their level of direct interaction.153 When the writers of Young Germany did speak to one another they did so primarily through critical reviews of each other's works. While these reviews did little to reduce the level of personal animosity between the men, they do serve to paint a relatively clear picture of the major issues which motivated each man. 1. In his capacity as editor of Literarischer Zodiacus154 Theodor Mundt reviewed all of In a 1973 dissertation Peter Burgel identified some 1367 letters (3347 pages), written by Gutzkow between 1830 and 1848. Of these he examined a narrower sample of 210 letters (15.5%) which nonetheless represented the breadth of Gutzkow's correspondence. In these 210 letters only one letter was addressed directly to Mundt and none to the other Young Germans. A further five letters mention Laube indirectly, four discuss Wienbarg, and six refer to Mundt. In terms of incoming correspondence, Biirgel's research reveals that Gutzkow received one letter from Mundt and none from the others. Though Biirgel's sample is relatively small, it is nonetheless apparent that direct correspondence among Gutzkow, Laube, Mundt and Wienbarg was minimal. See Peter Burgel, Die Briefe des friihen Gutzkow 1830 - 1848. Pathographie einerEpoche (Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 1975). 1 5 3 Ludolf Wienbarg was the only notable exception to this trend. He was one of the few Young Germans to have personal contact with several of the others. He worked with Laube on the Zeitung fur die elegante Welt and with Gutzkow on Phbnix: Fruhlingszeitung fur Deutschland. By 1835 he moved to Frankfurt am Main to become a standing contributor to Literarische und kritische Blatter der Borsen-Halle and to create a closer working relationship with Gutzkow. This relationship eventually produced the Deutsche Revue, a new literary journal which was to represent all of the best trends in the new literature. However, the ban of December 1835 ultimately prevented the publication of this journal. Following Wolfgang Menzel's attack on Gutzkow, Wienbarg wrote a blistering defence of his friend and co-worker: "Menzel und die junge Literatur. Programm zur deutschen Revue," (Mannheim: C. Lowenthal, 1835). 15ALiterarischer Zodiacus: Journal fur Zeit und Leben, Wissenschaft und Kunst 63 the major and minor works produced by Wienbarg, Gutzkow and Laube. In September 1835 Mundt produced a generally critical review of Heinrich Laube's Liebesbriefe, a novel inspired by Saint-Simonian principles.155 Summarizing Laube's motivation, Mundt observed that Laube had been motivated by Shakespeare's aphorism to 'hang philosophy unless philosophy can make a Juliet.' However, Mundt claimed that Laube had not only buried philosophy, but also Juliet in the process, by killing every aspect of her feminine nature and creating an entirely chimerical character. Mundt concluded that the usually sensible and worldly Laube had missed an excellent opportunity to set the new ideas of the Saint Simonians on love against the real social situation of the day. Instead the novel seemed to drift in the air, lost in destructive tendencies.156 Mundt's review concluded with the wish that Laube would soon produce a work that was more substantial. Evidently Mundt's opinion of Heinrich Laube did not change as the year progressed. In (Leipzig: Gebriider Reichenbach, 1835-1836). This journal was first published in October 1834 under the title Schriften in bunter Reihe zur Anregung und Unterhaltung mit Beitrdgen von dem Verfasser der Tutti Frutti, Leopold Schefer, Johann Schon, Heinrich Stieglitz, F.G. Kuhne u.A. (Leipzig: Gebriider Reichenbach, 1834). By 1835 the name had been changed to Literarischer Zodiacus. Though the journal received a special dispensation to continue publishing from the Prussian Censor on December 18, 1835, Reichenbach published only one more issue and then announced the end of the journal on February 4, 1836 in the Zeitung fur die elegante Welt. 1 5 5Theodor Mundt, "Liebesbriefe. Novelle von Heinrich Laube. Leipzig: Otto Wigand, 1835," Literarischer Zodiacus (September 1835), 219. 156Ibid., 220. One can see clearly Mundt's insistence that literature serve a practical purpose in his critique of Laube's work. 64 November 1835 Mundt responded to an anonymous piece published in the literary journal Minerva which had commented on the 'Young German school,' and had numbered Wienbarg, Mundt, Gutzkow, Ferdinand Gustav Kuhne and Laube among its members. In response to the inclusion of Laube Mundt argued that ... [Laube] ist der Dandy der jungen Literatur, der, ohne etwas Bestimmtes zu wissen und zu wollen, seine anmuthigen Spriinge macht, und, gewissermaBen wie ein Damenrevolutionair, mit seinem Liberalismus und seiner naturlichen Ethik ein Salonsgliick zu machen sucht.... indem er neben ihm einen Scfiriftsteller, wie Gutzkow, der einen weit ernstern und tiefern Willen und eine hohere Schaffenskraft besitzt, in der Vergleichung geringschatzig herabsetzt.157 Mundt thus acknowledged that there were fundamental differences between Gutzkow and Laube, so fundamental that to consider them in the same breath was to do a great disservice to Gutzkow's talents. Such comments were particularly remarkable given that they were made at a time when Mundt was otherwise expressing generally negative sentiments toward Gutzkow, especially with respect to the latter's recently-published novel Wally. In drawing the distinction between Gutzkow and Laube, Mundt also noted tangentially that the very idea of a school or clique worked against the purpose of the young literature which depended for its success upon the greatest personal freedom for its authors. This remark underscores the belief among the so-called Young German writers that they were following quite different paths. In October 1835, one month before Mundt's comments on the fundamental differences between Gutzkow and Laube, Mundt had reviewed Gutzkow's Wally,159 along with two 1 5 7Theodor Mundt, "Feuilleton," Literarischer Zodiacus (November 1835), 379. 1 5 8 Kar l Gutzkow, Wally: die Zweiflerin (Mannheim: C. Lowenthal, 1835). 65 recently-published collections of essays by Wienbarg: Wanderungen durch den Thierkreis and Zur neuesten Literatur.160 However, Wally was clearly at the forefront of Mundt's thoughts as all three reviews contained overt attacks on Gutzkow's most recent work. Mundt did, nonetheless, offer some insightful comments on Wienbarg's latest ventures. These comments were particularly illustrative of Mundt's own attitude towards literary production. His review of Wanderungen durch den Thierkreis included a retrospective look at Asthetische Feldzuge, Wienbarg's most significant work. Mundt lauded Asthetische Feldzuge as a courageous work which stood out as the best of the new literature, a book which should inspire Germany's young writers to better navigate their way in political, social and ethical matters.161 Above all Mundt observed that the humanity and nobility of Wienbarg's work distinguished him clearly from Gutzkow. "Wienbarg hat durch seine asthetischen Feldzuge etwas Positives gewirkt und manches tuchtige Gemuth fur die auf die Weltanschauung zu begriindende Aesthetik gewonnen."162 Whereas Wienbarg respected his enemies, Gutzkow preferred his criticism to slap his enemies in the face. Mundt concluded this digression on Gutzkow by noting that Gutzkow had yet to contribute anything positive to literature. Furthermore, Gutzkow's abrasive style was wholly responsible for the isolation of German literature and the destructive criticism which it had evoked. More importantly, Mundt argued 1 5 9 Ludolf Wienbarg, Wanderungen durch den Thierkreis (Hamburg: Hoffmann und Campe, 1835). 1 6 0 Ludolf Wienbarg, Zur neuesten Literatur (Mannheim: C. Lowenthal, 1835). 1 6 1Theodor Mundt, "Wanderungen durch den Thierkreis von Ludolf Wienbarg," Literarischer Zodiacus (October 1835), 281. 162Ibid, 282. 66 that Gutzkow's inclination towards rashness and his propensity for one-upmanship had tainted many important social questions. Because of these qualities 'decent' people were unable to accept him. As evidence of these accusations Mundt cited Gutzkow's provocative preface to Friedrich Schleiermacher's "Vertraute Briefe" on Friedrich Schlegel's Lucinde. Mundt did hold out some hope for the future, however, in that Wienbarg's recent move to Frankfurt might allow the two authors to combine their distinctive talents with more productive results.163 Returning to Wienbarg's most recent work, Wanderungen durch den Thierkreis, Mundt observed that the work was not equal to the quality of Asthetische Feldziige. He commented that the book had been hastily put together to the point that "[e]s ist wie eine As Mundt's opinion of Gutzkow began to change he evidently began to view this partnership with somewhat more enthusiasm as is evident in the following letter to Ferdinand Kuhne. However, it is equally obvious from this letter that Mundt retained certain reservations regarding Gutzkow: Das junge Deutschland sammelt sich jetzt in Frankfurt. a.M.! Auch Wienbarg ist dort und wird sein Domicil auf langere Zeit dort aufschlagen. Ich habe neulich wieder sehr dringende Mittheilungen vom jungen Deutschland gehabt, und will mit diesen Mannern, die sehr lebhaft einen festen Band wiinschen, wenigstens personlich und mundlich zu vereinigen und zu vermittlem suchen sollte! Gutzkow ubernimmt mit dem nachsten Jahre wahrscheinlich den ganzen 'Phonix.' Seine entsetzliche Tactlosigkeit durch die er Einen compromittiren kann, ehe man sich's versieht, mit der er es jedoch gar nicht iibel zu meinen scheint, ist das grosste Hinderniss zu einer planmassigen Verbindung. Man hore aber wenigstens, was werden kann und soli! Mundt to Kuhne, no date; Houben dates the letter around August 1835; Houben, Zeitschriften des Jungen Deutschlands, 2 Bde. (Berlin: Behr, 1906-9), 413. However, in light of Mundt's announcement in October 1835 that Gutzkow and Wienbarg had just formed a partnership, and Mundt's earlier implacable hostility toward Gutzkow, it seems more likely that this letter should be dated late October or November 1835. 67 skizzenhafte Semiotik der Zeitentwickelungskrankheiten zu betrachten." Alongside the works of Heine and Goethe which Wienbarg applauded, Mundt argued that this latest work made Wienbarg look like more of a fan than a colleague. In the same issue of Zodiacus Mundt also considered Wienbarg's Zur neuesten Literatur, a collection of six essays originally produced for the Literarischen und kritischen Blatter der Borsen-Halle 1 6 5 While Mundt was generally appreciative of Wienbarg's work in this volume, he had two specific criticisms. Mundt objected strongly to Wienbarg's unrestrained enthusiasm for Heine. Where Wienbarg had referred to Heine as the master of the so-called Young Germans, Mundt argued that Heine would laugh at such praise if he were to hear of it. Likewise he was critical of Wienbarg's whole-hearted support for Gutzkow. In particular, one of Wienbarg's essays had defended Gutzkow's controversial introductory comments to Schleiermachers Vertraute Briefe iiber die 'Lucinde' (1835). Mundt clearly disagreed with both Gutzkow's introduction and Wienbarg's defence, arguing that while total freedom would be better for Germany, it must come through a process of evolution and not from a complete disregard of all accepted conventions.166 Mundt saved his most scathing comments on Gutzkow for his review of Wally: die Zweiflerin. Mundt acknowledged that the basic question which had inspired Gutzkow was an 1 6 4Mundt, "Wanderungen," 283. 1 6 5The six essays were "Goethe und die Weltliteratur," "Furst Piickler," "Raupach und die deutsche Buhne," "Karl Immermann," "Heinrich Heine," and "Lucinde, Schleiermacher und Gutzkow." 1 6 6Theodor Mundt, "Zur neuesten Literatur von Ludolf Wienbarg," Literarischer Zodiacus (October 1835), 286-288. 68 important one. This was the question of whether or not Christianity had become a decrepit institution no longer of use in a changing society. Yet Mundt believed that Gutzkow had no more than scratched the surface of this issue. Instead of a detailed consideration, of the type proffered by Heine, the Saint Simonians and Rahel Varnhagen von Ense, Gutzkow had produced a cold and wholly unsympathetic novel. Mundt accused him of constructing a« sacrilegious portrayal of Christianity which reflected a particular malice on Gutzkow's part. The specific nature of this malice was not, however, explored. Mundt also rejected Gutzkow's claim that the sacrilegious thoughts of his characters did not reflect his own feelings. Rather Mundt argued that Gutzkow must accept the blame for having created these characters in the first place. In conclusion, he wrote that [d]ie Schreibart hat etwas absichtlich Trockenes und Herbes, ohne alle geschmackvolle Tinten, wodurch schwerlich eine neue, gluckliche Revolution des deutschen Stils bewirkt werden wird. Das ganze Buch macht den Eindruck wie von nafikaltem Wetter; nicht einmal ein Sonnenstaubchen blitzt erhellend und wohlthuend durch diese unheimlichen und wirren Regenschauer.167 The reviews of October 1835 clearly established the essential differences between Gutzkow and Mundt. Gutzkow was too brash and too destructive. His works had brought too much criticism upon the new literature and had failed to inspire other young writers to emulate either their style or content. Mundt believed that change must be an evolutionary process which did not attempt to overthrow all established conventions at once. He also objected strongly when the characterizations found in the new literature were too far removed from reality to be believable. Another point of contention between the two concerned the role of the critic in this 1 6 7Theodor Mundt, "Wally, die Zweiflerin. Roman von Carl Gutzkow," Literarischer Zodiacus (October 1835), 285-286. 69 period, an issue to which Gutzkow had given considerable thought. Gutzkow believed that the role of both criticism and the critic was vital. "Alles was in den zu Grabe getragenen Zeiten Geist hatte, fliichtete sich in die Kritik. Sie iibernahm einen ununterbrochenen Feldzug gegen die Herrschaft des Ruhms und die Prahlerei des Elends." 1 6 8 Gutzkow had further observed that since the time of Lessing criticism had been the nemesis of the old school and the vehicle of the hopes of youth. Despite Mundt's belief that Gutzkow's criticism was entirely destructive, Gutzkow had argued that his was an effective style of criticism which did not merely destroy. Rather, it had a surgical effect; it healed, restored and made whole a literature which had been systematically destroyed by misguided critics, by the police and by an irresolute public. 1 6 9 For Mundt, however, this type of criticism, surgically applied or not, carried too great a risk—the risk of subjecting the new literature to isolation and destructive counter-criticism. Having established quite forcefully that there were fundamental issues of disagreement between the two men, Mundt appeared to undergo a complete reversal of opinion over the following two months. In November 1835 he published a generally positive review of Gutzkow's play Nero110 Mundt began by emphasizing the importance of approaching Gutzkow's works objectively, despite the ongoing battle between Gutzkow and Wolfgang Menzel. In Mundt's opinion Nero marked a turning point for Gutzkow, an abandonment of the obstinate pig-headed skepticism of recent years and a return to the creativity of his youthful 1 6 8 Kar l Gutzkow, Untitled, Phonix: Friihlingszeitung fur Deutschland, Literaturblatt Nr. 1 (7.01.1835), 22. l69Ibid. 1 7 0 Kar l Gutzkow, Nero. Eine Tragodie (Stuttgart & Tubingen: Cotta, 1835). 70 writings: Thus Gutzkow had been able to capture the truth of his own era and of Nero's era with his portrayal of the Emperor as both a victim of Rome as well as its destroyer. This review marked Mundt's most sympathetic treatment of Gutzkow, as Mundt even attempted to understand what drove the author to such controversial lengths. "Gutzkow liebt nichts.... Was wird ihm iibrig bleiben? Ein Richard'sches ,1 am myself alone'? Aber ich sage euch, Gutzkow's geheime Geliebte ist die Wahrheit, fur die er zittert, bebt und ringt, auf die er eifersuchtig ist!" 1 7 1 The volte-face on Gutzkow continued in the December 1835 Zodiacus as Mundt turned his attention to Offentliche Charaktere, the first volume of Gutzkow's essays on the leading writers of his era. 1 7 2 Again Mundt returned to the subject of Gutzkow's motivation, arguing that he was fundamentally a private person whose beliefs were only manifest in words and not deeds. Gutzkow's revolution would be an internal one. Mundt argued that Gutzkow was difficult for many to understand because "Gutzkow ist nicht fur die Kirche, nicht fur die Schule, nicht fur das Haus... aber er ist fur den Staat, fur allgemeine peripherische Verhaltnisse und fur die Puncte, welche diese Peripherie bilden.... Was offiziell, was der Geschichte verfallen ist, was auf den Marktplatzen des offentlichen Lebens, in London und Paris, in Madrid und Berlin, in Constantinopel und Kairo handelt und wandelt und an der Geschichte Theodor Mundt, "Nero. Eine Tragodie von Carl Gutzkow," Literarischer Zodiacus (November 1835), 360. 1 7 2 Kar l Gutzkow, Offentliche Charaktere, Erster Theil (Hamburg: Hoffmann u. Campe, 1835). A planned second volume was never published due to the Prussian edict of suppression. 71 mitarbeitet, das ist Gutzkow's!" On the work in question, Mundt remarked that every word had been carefully crafted and complimented Gutzkow's grasp of the complex issues of his day. "Furwahr! Ich bewundere Gutzkow's mannigfaltige Kenntnisse im politischen Fache eben so sehr, als die Art, wir er sie verarbeitet und angewandt hat. Seine literarischen Siinden seien ihm um der Tugenden willen, die er in diesem Buch entwickelte und zu entwickeln Gelegenheit hatte, vergeben!"174 Noting that the current furore surrounding the publication of Wally had led many Berliners to view Gutzkow as the Antichrist, Mundt indicated that personally he had begun to rethink his earlier stance on Gutzkow: Ich habe begonnen nachzudenken... wie es geschehen mag, dafi ein unbesonnener jugendlicher Mensch, von den Scrupeln der Zeit miterfafit, uns aus unserm jammerlichen Halbzustande zwischen Glauben und Unglauben... zuruckfuhren will —ich habe bei dieser Untersuchung einen die Nothwendigkeit dieser Erscheinung motivirenden historischen Standpunct angestrebt — noch dunkelt es in mir — aber die Zeit wird Licht bringen.175 Precisely at the moment when it was most dangerous to take Gutzkow's side, Mundt evidently recanted all of his earlier accusations and sought to explain the necessity of Gutzkow's work to an overtly hostile public. Mundt never acknowledged the motives behind his defence of Gutzkow and barely one month after his sympathetic words once again attempted to distance himself from his contemporary: Gleichzeitige Bestrebungen anderer Schriftsteller, mit denen ich zusammen rangirt worden bin, ohne jemals gemeinsame Verabredung mit ihren gehabt zu haben, sind mir offenbar ebenso schadlich, wenn nicht schadlischer geworden, 1 7 3Theodor Mundt, "Offentliche Charaktere von Carl Gutzkow," Literarischer Zodiacus (December 1835), 452. ™Ibid., 454. 72 als meinen eigene Jugend und meine eigenen Tendenzen. Ueber die letzteren bin ich dermassen mit mir zu Rathe gegangen, dass ich auf Ehre und Gewissen die Versicherung abgeben kann: es sei in mir kein gefahrlicher und verderblicher Widerspruch gegen die bestehende Ordnung in der sittlichen, religiosen, und politischen Welt vorhanden.176 There appear to be several reasons for this short-lived change of heart. The most obvious explanation for Mundt's enthusiasm was his stated desire to enter into a closer collaboration with Gutzkow and Wienbarg in Frankfurt. While this might not entirely account for Mundt's willingness to put himself at risk, it does go some way to providing a rationale for his belated attempt to understand Gutzkow's motivation. Moreover, for better or worse, Gutzkow's work was attracting considerable publicity, publicity which Mundt might have viewed as beneficial i f a joint publishing venture was going to be launched. Another possible explanation would be that Mundt might not have perceived the danger inherent in taking sides in the ongoing Gutzkow-Menzel dispute.177 Menzel's attacks appeared to be directed primarily at Gutzkow and there was no reason to assume that the repercussions would affect anyone other than Gutzkow. Finally, Mundt had not, in any substantial way, changed his earlier assertions. His commendation of Nero was based on his belief that Gutzkow was finally moving away from Theodor Mundt quoted in Houben, Zeitschriften des Jungen Deutschlands, Bd. 1, (Berlin: Behr, 1906); (Hildesheim: Georg Olms, 1970), 157. 1 7 7The vitriolic exchange between Gutzkow and Wolfgang Menzel began in January 1835 when Menzel published a series of articles in the Morgenblatt fiir gebildete Stdnde which denounced the Young Germans as a dangerous pro-French phenomenon and urged the censors to take action to protect Germans from this threat. After the appearance of Wally Menzel's attacks intensified as did Gutzkow's protestations of innocence. Gutzkow finally published a lengthy essay attacking Menzel and defending his own work. The essay was entitled "Vertheidigung gegen Menzel und Berichtigung einiger Urtheile im Publikum" (Mannheim: Lowenthal, 1835). 73 his destructively abrasive style and the obstinate pig-headed skepticism which had dominated his recent work and instead was returning to the creativity of his youth. 1 7 8 2. Given that Mundt's early criticisms of Gutzkow were based on the fact that Gutzkow was too destructive and abrasive in his criticism, it is hardly surprising to discover that Gutzkow's criticisms of Mundt accused him of precisely the opposite fault. In January 1835 Gutzkow commented on the appearance of the new literary journal Schriften in hunter Reihe (later Literarischer Zodiacus), noting that the venture itself was a promising one but Mundt's style was often tiresome and burdened and his literary speculation was too tentative to be of interest. Gutzkow attributed this failure to Mundt's fascination with the Hegelian world-view which had left him over-burdened with worries.1 7 9 More promisingly Gutzkow observed that "[i]n jedem neuen Buch wird Th. Mundt heller, dreister: er streift immer mehr Hiillen von sich ab: und macht wie ein achter Philosoph einen Durchgang durch die Negation, aus welchem er immer liebenswiirdiger und schoner hervortritt."180 1 7 8Mundt, "Nero. Eine Tragodie," 359. 1 7 9 Kar l Gutzkow, "Schriften in hunter Reihe. Herausgegeben von Theodor Mundt," Phbnix: Fruhlingszeitung fur Deutschland, Literaturblatt Nr. 2 (14.1.1835), 46-47; Gutzkow was not the only one to notice the heavy hand of Hegelian philosophy on Mundt's work. Mundt himself remarked upon this in September 1835. "Ich glaube, ich war der erste unter der jungen Literatur, welcher, schon im Jahre 1829, in mehrern Aufsatzen das freie Leben der Personlichkeit, besonders aber die Rechte der Kunst, gegen den alle Individuelle verzehrenden Begriff der Hegel'schen Philosophic geltend zu machen suchte; und sodann strebte ich, was flir uns Norddeutsche ein so schwieriger DurchgangsprozeB ist, meine Vergangenheit mit der neuen Gegenwart zu vermitteln...." Theodor Mundt, Untitled, Literarischer Zodiacus (September 1835), 217. 1 8 0Gutzkow, "Schriften in hunter Reihe" 47. 74 The sympathetic tone evident in Gutzkow's January 1835 Phonix article continued in his review of Mundt's Madonna: Unterhaltungen mit einer Heiligen. After commending Mundt for his attention to detail and the continued development of his poetic talents, Gutzkow remarked that he was particularly impressed by Mundt's characterization of Maria—the Madonna to whom the title refers. "Alles, was Mundt in Beziehung auf seine Heldin erfindet, ist genial und hinreiBend schon dargestellt.... Der Spiritualismus Madonna's bezaubert, ihre Bekenntnisse wird man mit Entzucken lesen."181 Though Gutzkow believed that Mundt was never a particularly inspired philosopher, he observed that he was a very good poet and concluded that if Mundt were to continue to produce works of this quality he would be able to develop his artistic abilities to new heights and this would be an entirely positive development.182 Between the two relatively favourable accounts of Mundt's work, Gutzkow published a far less complimentary diatribe in the April 1, 1835 edition of Phonix,183 In this article Karl Gutzkow, "Madonna: Unterhaltungen mit einer Heiligen von Theodor Mundt," Phonix: Fruhlingszeitungfiir Deutschland, Literaturblatt Nr. 18 (7.5.1835), 429. n2Ibid, 430. 1 8 3 Kar l Gutzkow, "Theodor Mundt, Willibald Alexis und die Pommersche Dichterschule, oder iiber einige literar-historische Symptome," Phonix: Fruhlingszeitung fur Deutschland, Literaturblatt Nr. 13 (1.4.35), 309-311. This article was the subject of a confused exchange between Theodor Mundt and the publisher of the Revue du Nord in September 1835. Evidently an author for the Revue had picked up on Gutzkow's use of the term 'Pommersche Dichterschule' and had subsequently attacked Mundt for his Pomeranian origins, noting that the area was better known for its goose-liver than the quality of its intellectuals. Mundt not only defended his origins but also accused the author of not reading the article but rather trying to prove that he was up-to-date with the daily literature by casually mentioning titles. Mundt alleged that Gutzkow had never counted him among the Pomeranians; Mundt, Literarischer Zodiacus (September 1835), 381-382. In fact Gutzkow did include Mundt in his derogatory 75 Gutzkow objected to enthusiastic comments made by Mundt in the introductory chapter to Madonna entitled "Posthorn-Symphonie." Mundt had published this chapter in its entirety in the February 1835 edition of Literarischer Zodiacus to announce the forthcoming publication of Madonna. The article was a rousing call for the new literature to move forward as loudly and self-confidently as possible. Mundt had opened and concluded his remarks with the call "Trarara! Trara! Trara!" 1 8 4 Gutzkow seized upon this comment asking ... was meint Theodor Mundt damit, wenn er im zweiten Hefte des Zodiakus die geheimniBvollen Worte ausstoBt: Trarara! Trara! Trara!? Bei Gott, uns wird ganz narrisch zu Muthe, wenn man den Spektakel mit anhort.... Soil dieses unartikulirte Wort die Devise der neuen Berlinischen Bewegungsliteratur werden? Trarara! Trara! Trara!... Leute, betet einen Abendsegen!... Theodor Mundt will unaufhorliche Emanzipation, fortwahrendes Losringen von sich selbst, alle Tage ein neues Kleid, so wie es die Mode mit sich bringt, er will nur in Athem bleiben, um Trara! zu Rufen.... Es ist ein neuer Egoismus.1 8 5 Gutzkow's main objection to the youthful enthusiasm of Mundt echoed the criticism which Mundt would redirect toward Gutzkow later in the year. Mundt's over-enthusiasm portrayed the new movement in a negative light for too many people and this was intolerable to Gutzkow. "Es ist grundfalsch, daB unsere Zeit negativ sei. Sie ist so positiv, wie irgend eine."186 The problem, according to Gutzkow, was that the new literature has lost its focus, remarks on the Pomeranian writers school in his original article (April 1835) but when he returned to the subject on August 1, 1835 he omitted Mundt's name; Karl Gutzkow, "Die Pommer'sche Dichterschule," Phonix: Fruhlingszeitung fur Deutschland, Literaturblatt Nr. 30 (1.8.35), 717-719. Mundt must therefore have read the second article but not the first. 1 8 4Theodor Mundt, "Posthorn Symphonie," Literarischer Zodiacus, (February 1835), 97-98 and 112. 1 8 5Gutzkow, "Theodor Mundt, Willibald Alexis," 309-311. n6Ibid.,3\\. 76 choosing noise over constructive contributions to building a new century. "Ich glaube an die Zeit, die allmachtige Schopferin Himmels und der Erden, und ihren eingebornen Sohn, die Kunst, welche viel gelitten hat... und doch die Welt erlosen helfen wird, und bis dahin glaub' ich an den heiligen Geist der Kritik, welchen die Zeit gesandt hat, zu richten die Lebendigen und die Todten." 1 8 7 These criticisms underlined the seriousness with which Gutzkow addressed the task of building a new literature and, by extension, a new socio-political era: Die groBe politische St. Georgszeit und kritische Drachenkampfperiode ist voruber. Ein marchenhafter Sagenkreis hat sich schon gebildet von den Rittern mit flammenden Schwertern, von Borne, dem schwarzen Paladine auf dem Verzweiflung wiehernden Rosse Witz, von Heine, dem tapfern und galanten Chevalier... von Menzel, dem wahrhaften Landsknechte und Condottiere des Feldzuges, der den Kern der Schlachtordnung bildete.... Immerhin! die Tarantel hat sie gestochen, sie konnen nichts daftir.188 The future must be left to those men who had the ability to construct a new world. Gutzkow did not deny that it was necessary to tear down the old world, but this task was completed and it was essential to move forward.1 8 9 Whereas Gutzkow's attitude towards Mundt was generally negative, his opinion of Heinrich Laube changed markedly over the years. The two first met in 1833 when Gutzkow travelled through Italy with Laube. During this time he had read Laube's newest novel Das 197Ibid. This was perhaps the strongest statement of Gutzkow's commitment to a critical literature which would be capable of transforming the world. n*Ibid, 309. 1 8 9This exchange foreshadowed the accusation that Wolfgang Menzel's work lacked seriousness, a charge which Gutzkow would level against Menzel later in the year. 77 junge Europa. Upon his return Gutzkow remarked on his experiences with Laube in a letter to Wolfgang Menzel. Gutzkow wrote that Laube ist 27 Jahr alt, hat eine Nase wie ein Kalmuck, 1 9 1 und eine winzige untersetzte Statur... Trotz seines noblen Aufzugs hat er doch zuviel vom Studenten. Seine Lebhaftigkeit ist nur Vehemenz... Unterwegs hab' ich seine Novelle 'Das junge Europa' gelesen und habe ihm offen gestanden, dafi mir jeder Zug in ihr zuwider ist. 1 9 2 In 1835 Gutzkow continued his attack on Laube because of the latter's involvement with the publisher Brockhaus. The actual target of the article was Heinrich Brockhaus himself. Gutzkow accused Brockhaus of regularly using the literary journal Blatter fur literarische Unterhaltung (which was published by Brockhaus) as a cheap way to advertise forthcoming Brockhaus publications through lengthy bookseller notices and favourable reviews. "Auf diesem natiirlichen Wege ist Raumer ein grofier Geschichtsforscher geworden, Krug ein grofier Philosoph, Neigebaur ein grofier Geograph, Wachsmuth ein grofier Stylist, mein Huber ein klarer Kopf, und Sigismund Wiese eine vielversprechende Hoffhung."1 9 3 Originally Gutzkow believed that this was not such a bad thing as the public was well aware of what was going on and entertained themselves by reading the biased articles. However, under the editorship of Heinrich Laube and Gustav Schlesier, during the period 1834 to 1835, the deception had 1 9 0Given the timing of the trip Gutzkow likely read only the first volume of Das junge Europa, Die Poeten. 1 9 1Kalmuck refers to an ethnic group from Western Mongolia. 1 9 2Gutzkow to Wolfgang Menzel, 20.9.1833; BdfG, 63-64. 1 9 3 Kar l Gutzkow, " H . Brockhaus, P. Lyser und die kritischen Zahlen um Leipzig," Phonix: Fruhlingszeitung fur Deutschland, Literaturblatt Nr. 9 (4.3.1835), 213. Note that Gutzkow took this opportunity to attack his former teacher, Raumer. 78 become more veiled and therefore more dangerous. Gutzkow accused Laube in particular of dividing authors into good and bad categories without reading their works. Laube would excoriate those works which he alone judged to be bad. 1 9 4 These comments echoed an earlier accusation of 'einsylbigen' 'Terrorismus' which Gutzkow had levelled against Laube in an 1834 letter to Gustav Schlesier.195 Thus for the majority of their acquaintance Gutzkow was openly hostile towards Laube and his work. However, this opinion changed dramatically in June 1835 as Gutzkow reviewed Laube's Liebesbriefe, the novella which Theodor Mundt would denounce as shallow and incomplete later in the year. Gutzkow, however, believed that Laube was the best representative of the modern that German literature had. 1 9 6 Laube's novel had woven a new interpretation of the future, a future in which a social revolution would be brought about through the emancipation of love. Though Gutzkow criticized Laube's tendency to use stereotypical phrases and observations since they detracted from the interesting nature of the story itself, it was nonetheless apparent that Laube's subject matter stuck a resonant chord with Gutzkow. "Wir schwarmen flir eine Erlosung der Menschheit aus den Banden der Convenienz und des Vorurtheils, wir kampfen gegen die Institutionen, welche den Gottesdienst der Natur verdrangen, wir wollen die Liebe vom Gesetze trennen, und die Wahl bis zum Besitze ohne 194Ibid, 214. 1 9 5Gutzkow to Gustav Schlesier, 27.11.1834; BdfG, 65. Given Gutzkow's ongoing communication with Schlesier it appears that even though he named Schlesier as a guilty party in the Brockhaus affair, he did not consider his offences a great as those of Laube. 1 9 6 Kar l Gutzkow, "Liebesbriefe. Novelle von Heinrich Laube" in Phonix: Fruhlingszeitung fur Deutschland, Literaturblatt Nr. 25 (27.6.1835), 598. 79 Zwischenraum lassen." On the dedication of the work to Laube's mentor, Fiirst Piickler-Muskau, Gutzkow commented that this was decent and proper. Gutzkow did, however, have one serious objection to Liebesbriefe; Gutzkow accused Laube of occasional dilettantism, of exploiting the subject matter for his own benefit rather than working for the freedom of all, a goal which was ultimately far more important.198 Gutzkow explained his more positive attitude towards Laube in a letter to Karl August Varnhagen von Ense dated October 28, 1835: Sie haben fur Laube eine Art geistiger Vormundschaft... ubernommen, die ihn wie sein Genius umgiebt... Sein Ausdruck hat an Concinnitat gewonnen, seine Auffassung ist gemafiigt und wahlerisch... Laube, wie er war, zerging mir nicht recht auf der Zunge. Er war ffuher eine etwas marzipanartige, hartgebackene SiiBigkeit, an der man kauen muBte. Jetzt ist sein ganzes Wesen fliissig geworden... Ich ffeue mich nur, daB er durch Sie Grazie und Sinn fur stylistische Schonheit bekommen hat.1 9 9 Gutzkow's complimentary remarks could therefore be seen as an attempt to curry favour with the influential Varnhagen von Ense, rather than a genuine change of heart regarding Laube. The final remarks on Laube's continuing dilettantism demonstrate Gutzkow's true feelings regarding Laube's skills. Earlier in October Gutzkow had continued to sound a cautionary note regarding Laube in a letter to Ludwig Borne. Anxious to distinguish himself in Bdrne's eyes, Gutzkow had noted that "Lauben vertret ich nicht: er ist nicht reif u. similirt [sic]." 2 0 0 Thus, l91Ibid, 598-599. l9SIbid, 599. 1 9 9Gutzkow to Varnhagen von Ense, 28.10.1835; BdjG, 64. 2 0 0Gutzkow to Ludwig Borne: 2.10.1835. BdjG, 64. 80 with the exception of the Liebesbriefe review, Gutzkow's attitude towards Laube was generally negative. Though his willingness to offer an alternative to the accepted norms of the day was considered to be very valuable by Gutzkow, the fact that he did so to advance his own personal agenda negated much of the value of his work. Gutzkow clearly believed that the task facing the authors of the new literature was too serious to be derailed by such personal ambitions. Several weeks after the June 1835 Literaturblatt article commending Laube's Liebesbriefe Gutzkow turned his attention to Ludolf Wienbarg's Zur neuesten Literatur, the work about which Mundt had expressed serious reservations. 2 0 1 Gutzkow, however, argued that this work was on the cutting edge of the literary creations of his era, a marvel both in terms of the truth contained within the work and the beauty of its style.2 0 2 Gutzkow observed that the article on Furst Piickler-Muskau was a model of the role that wit could play in criticism; the Raupach piece was classically written and contributed much to a German people sadly lacking in a sense of their own history.203 Gutzkow thanked Wienbarg for his 'lovely and friendly words' in "Lucinde, Schleiermacher und Gutzkow" and concluded with the hope that a new edition of Wienbarg's work would appear shortly. In the meantime Gutzkow promised a 2 0 1 K a r l Gutzkow, uZur neuesten Literatur, von L . Wienbarg," Phonix: Fruhlingszeitung fur Deutschland, Literaturblatt Nr. 31 (8.8.1835), 741. 2 0 2It is not surprising that Gutzkow found Zur neuesten Literatur so commendable given Wienbarg's unrestrained defence of Gutzkow's commentary on Friedrich Schleiermacher's Vertraute Briefe on Friedrich Schlegel's Lucinde. Ludolf Wienbarg, "Lucinde, Schleiermacher und Gutzkow," Zur neuesten Literatur (Mannheim: C. Lowenthal, 1835); (Berlin: Aufbau, 1964), 278. 2 0 3Gutzkow, "Zur neuesten Literatur," 741. 81 more complete biography of Wienbarg in the next issue of the Literaturblatt. Despite this favourable review Gutzkow evidently treated Wienbarg with a degree of condescension in his personal correspondence. In a letter to Borne Gutzkow observed that "Wienbargs Stellung ist noch immer eine rein zufallige: seine Schriften entstehen aus Nebenursachen."205 A few days later he remarked to Varnhagen von Ense that his collaboration with Wienbarg on the Deutsche Revue was based only on the fact that "Wienbarg liebt mich so herzlich, daB er mir schon oft angeboten hat, die Fehler, die ich begehe, offentlich sich zuzuschreiben."206 This tone can be attributed to the fact that less than one year earlier Gutzkow had dismissed Wienbarg's talents as those of a politician not an artist. "Wienbarg ist ein geschickter Fechter, der sich durchschlagt u weiter nichts wil l . . . Wenn er einen andern Anlauf (manchmal blofl den Anlauf des Styls) nimmt, so rennt er auch wohl das einmal durch, was er vorhin anders gewollt hat. Ich wuBte Niemand, der bei seiner glanzenden Suade so zu politischen Parteiungen zu brauchen ware, als Wienbarg."2 0 7 Few reasons were given for Gutzkow's denial of Wienbarg's talent. However, there is no doubt that Wienbarg received far 2 0 4Gutzkow was reviewing the advance printing of Wienbarg's new book which had appeared in the Hamburg Borsenhalle in July 1835. Several sections of the work had been omitted from the Borsenhalle because of fears of the Hamburg censor. Shortly after Gutzkow's call for a new edition his friend and publisher Carl Lowenthal did in fact publish a new edition of Zur neuesten Literatur, the edition which Mundt reviewed in the October 1835 Zodiacus. The promised biography never came to fruition as the next edition of the Literaturblatt was devoted to a review of Friedrich Gustav Kuhne's Eine Quarantdne im Irrenhause and shortly thereafter Gutzkow was fired by Phonix editor Eduard Duller for, among other things, his merciless skewering of the latter's historical novel Kronen und Ketten. 2 0 5Gutzkow to Borne, 2.10.1835; BdjG, 75. 2 0 6Gutzkow to Varnhagen von Ense, 2.10.1835; BdjG, 75. 2 0 7 Gutzkowto Schlesier, 27.11.1834;£d/G, 74-75. 82 greater accolades for his seminal work, Asthetische Feldziige, than Gutzkow ever experienced. Thus, professional jealously cannot be eliminated as a motive for Gutzkow's petulance. Gutzkow's penultimate appearance as editor of the Literaturblatt was marked by one of his most bitter reviews—a review which seemed to reflect a growing disillusionment with the entire literary establishment. The unfortunate target was Ferdinand Gustav Kuhne, Mundt's partner on the Literarischer Zodiacus. Gutzkow began by noting that there was a strange wind blowing out of Berlin: Welch ein sonderbarer Zugwind weht von Berlin heriiber? Die zerrissene Philosophic der Rahel, Bettinen's poetische Unrnittelbarkeit, der Stieglitz tragisches Ende, Mundt's manadenhaftes Renegatenthum [Madonna], [Willibald] Alexis' diistre Verwirrung in seinem jungsten Buche, und nun dies neue wehmuthige Chaos, in welches uns Kuhne blicken laBt. 2 0 8 Gutzkow condemned Kuhne's work as the last gasp of an Hegelian, a novel filled with unoriginal thought and vague characterizations. He also took the opportunity to level another attack at Theodor Mundt: "Mundt und Kuhne sind bis jetzt die ausgewachsensten Blumen, welche aus der allmahligen Verwesung des Berliner Lebens hervorkeimen. Es sind Todtenblumen, beide, sie haben keinen erquickenden Duft und sind in ihren Bliithensternen mit angstlicher Symmetric abgemessen."209 Given the Hegelian form in which Kuhne's book was written, Gutzkow felt that his work could not possibly help the nation and its youth. 2 1 0 Again, 2 0 8 K a r l Gutzkow, "Eine Quarantine im Irrenhause von F.G. Kuhne," Phonix: Fruhlingszeitung fur Deutschland, Feuilleton zum Phonix (15.8.1835), 765. 209Ibid, 765. 2 1 0Despite the fact that Gutzkow had been deeply influenced by Hegel during his years at the University of Berlin, he later criticized Hegel for being too systematic and too willing to accept the existing socio-political system. In February 1835 Gutzkow wrote that "[d]ie 83 as in his attacks on Mundt, Gutzkow focussed on Kuhne's tendency to emphasize noise over substance. However, the fact that Kuhne emphasized his own nobility while poking fun at those who were less fortunate was an even worse sin in Gutzkow's eyes. He concluded the review with the disillusioned remark, "[g]eht weg, ihr seid Kinder!" 2 1 1 Gutzkow's condemnation stood in stark contrast to Mundt's opinion of Kuhne's work. Whereas Gutzkow had condemned the Hegelian style in which the book was written regardless of its purpose, Mundt believed that using the Hegelian form was the best way to capture the essence of that system and provide a very accurate and truthful representation of an important period in the development of the German spirit. "Sie bezeichnet... den Culminationspunkt eines mit Speculation getrankten und iibersattigten Nationalcharakters."212 Mundt had concluded by observing that this was a courageous account of the crucial battle that was taking place between the stability of the system and the freedom of man to exploit his alternatives.213 Gutzkow, however, saw no such courage at work. For him the book simply replicated the archaic belief that art served only itself and that the artist remained fundamentally apart from the world of reality, a belief which Gutzkow was determined to eradicate. Hegelsche Construktionssucht erzeugt ein moralisches, oder meinetwegen ein politisches Laster, namlich den Geschichtsstupor." Karl Gutzkow, "Gans und die Doktrinare," Phonix: Fruhlingszeitung fur Deutschland, Literaturblatt Nr. 6 (11.02.1835), 143. 2 1 1Gutzkow, "Eine Quarantdne" 767. 2 1 2Theodor Mundt, "Eine Quarantdne im Irrenhause. Novelle aus den Papieren eines Mondsteiners. Herausgegeben von Dr. F.G. Kuhne," Literarischer Zodiacus (September 1835), 219. 2UIbid, 216. 84 3. Heinrich Laube was the third and final member of the Young Germans who reviewed the works of the other Young German writers in his capacity as editor of a major journal. The reviews produced during Laube's tenure with Brockhaus at the Blatter fur literarische Unterhaltung are singularly uninformative likely due to the heavy hand of Heinrich Brockhaus in determining what could and could not be published. However, as editor of Zeitung fur die elegante Welt, Laube produced some lengthy and insightful reviews. Laube's reviews were very different from those published by Theodor Mundt in Literarischer Zodiacus and Karl Gutzkow in Phonix. Whereas Gutzkow and Mundt devoted most of their attention to the critical examination of the works in question, Laube tended to treat his reviews as a platform from which to advance his own views on certain subjects, while at the same time providing his audience with short passages from the work under consideration. Laube's review of Gutzkow's "Briefe eines Narren an eine Narrin'' was primarily an aside on the way in which new legal and moral codes were being formed. Laube believed that his was a crucial epoch in the transformation of human society. This was the time for every concerned writer to contribute his opinions on every subject and once all views were aired a new code would emerge: darum muBen wir sie erinnern, eiligst aufzusitzen auf den Schreibesel, damit sie vor AbschluB der groBen Weltrechnungen ankommen im Publicum... [W]enn alle einzeln aufgegangen sind, da ist der Baum grim, wenn alle Schriftsteller zusammengekommen sind, dann haben wir eine Versammlung, und so wie der griine Baum Friichte zeitigen wird, so wird unsere Versammlung Gesetze bechlieBen, und uber Nacht wird der Sommer und iiber Nacht wird der Herbst da seyn...214 214Heinrich Laube, "Briefe eine Narren an eine Narrin. Hamburg bei Hoffmann und 85 Turning finally to the work before him, Laube was extremely complimentary towards Gutzkow: Dieser Briefsteller ist aber darum so liebenswiirdig, weil er so viel weiB und so wenig wissen will, weil er so reich ist und doch zu FuB geht, weil er nicht bios gelehrt, sondern auch gebildet, nicht bios gebildet, sondern auch poetisch ist . . . Ich schrieb fruher iiber den Verfasser und seine Briefe Folgendes: 'Es ist erquickend, wenn man in dem Wirthshaustreiben der heutigen Welt einen Mann von Bildung findet, einen Mann der poetischen Humanitat entdeckt...'215 Laube seemed particularly fascinated by the way in which Gutzkow's work appeared to be an unfettered exercise in freedom, though he cautioned that so much freedom could be superfluous and some order would be necessary before the new social laws could emerge. Laube provided only a few excerpts from Gutzkow's work at the end of his review because "[e]s ist nichts mit den Ausziigen, man bringt ein paar Bliithen und verlangt, daB die Leute den Friihling bewundern sollen." 2 1 6 In conclusion, Laube reminded his readers of his comments on Heinrich Heine's Franzdsische Zustande. There he had argued that it was natural in an era of great change for each author to follow a narrow direction and for each to have his own circle; yet each circle would have points of contact with the others and thus, ultimately, a new world would be formed.2 1 7 Campe, 1832," Zeitung fur die elegante Welt, Nr. 42 (28.2.1833), 165. Although Gutzkow was not identified as the author in the article due to the fact that the piece was published anonymously, Laube indicated in his review that he knew the identity of the writer. One can see in this and subsequent pieces written by Laube the heavy influence of Romantic imagery: spring, awakening, night, and day are prominently featured in Laube's essays and novels. . 2l5Ibid, 166. 2l6Ibid, 168. 2 1 7Heinrich Laube, "Franzdsische Zustande, von H . Heine. Hamburg bei Hoffmann und 86 Laube was similarly complimentary toward Ludolf Wienbarg's 1833 travel book Holland in den Jahren 1831 und 1832. Once again the bulk of the review was devoted to Laube's views on the value of travel but he nonetheless found time to observe that the book in question was an excellent example of the travel novella, the genre popularized by Heine's Reisebilder.219 Laube marvelled at Wienbarg's ability to provide a comprehensive overview of the present situation in Holland: [W]enn man mit dem Buche zu Ende ist, sieht man den ganzen Hollander mit den Lineamenten des alten Friesen und Batavers, mit dem zornigen Auge des protestantischen Eiferers, des kecken Wassergeusen,219 mit dem trostlosen Lacheln des egoistischen Kauffnannes, mit den plumpen Beinen des indifferenten Weltbiirgers auf den Brucken... 2 2 0 Laube was most impressed by Wienbarg's ability to consider all that was important in Holland: art and politics, the cities and the rural areas. He concluded, "unsere Reisen naherten sich einem hohern Standpuncte."221 Campe, 1833," Zeitung fur die elegante Welt, Nrs. 32 & 37 (14.2.1833/21.2.1833), 127; also, Laube, "Briefe eine Narren," 168. 2 1 8Laube would venture into the field of travelogues himself in 1834 with his Reisenovellen (Leipzig: Brockhaus, 1834). Butler believed that Laube's efforts were so completely modeled upon Heine's Reisebilder, that it was impossible to determine anything about Laube himself from these works. Butler, The Saint Simonian Religion, 223-240. The romantic belief that travel was the greatest exercise in human freedom features prominently in the work of Laube and Theodor Mundt. The format of the Reisebilder, a combination of political commentary and travel guide, was utilized by each of the 'Young German' authors. 2 1 9The Wassergeusen were the Dutch freedom-fighters who had opposed the rule of the Spanish Hapsburgs in the sixteenth century. 2 2 0Heinrich Laube, "Holland in den Jahren 1831 und 1832, von Ludolf Wienbarg, der Philosophic Doctor, 1. Th. Hamburg bei Hoffmann und Campe, 1833," Zeitung fiir die elegante Welt, Nr. 57 (21.3.1833), 228. 87 Laube first turned his attention to Theodor Mundt's work in May 1833. This review parenthetically provided several interesting insights into his own opinion on the new literature. Laube observed that by virtue of the fact that Mundt's most recent work, "Madelon, oder die Romantiker in Paris," was concerned with new material and viewpoints it had already raised itself above the great mass of literature being produced. Further, though many commentators had condemned the young writers for their proximity to the French Romantic school, Laube applauded this trait in Mundt observing that "[d]ie romantische Schule in Frankreich hat einen so iiberwaltigenden EinfluB auf die ffanzosische Literatur erlangt... sie bewegt sich auf einem Terrain, das bunt und interessant ist wie die Laterna magica.... Das geistige Wesen der neuern Novelle wird ebenfalls in Anspruch genommen: es entwickeln sich neue Begriffe, Ideen, Ansichten..."2 2 2 Once again Laube concluded by returning to his favourite theme, the importance of continual challenges to the traditional system in the establishment of a new order. Mundt's latest book was exemplary because it had successfully brought together both historical-philosophical understanding and poetic talent. New blood flowed through its characters, the surroundings were enticing and the fantastic entanglements of the characters wove new laws. 2 2 3 In July 1833 Laube addressed another of Mundt's short novellas "Der Basilisk, oder Gesichterstudien" which he considered to be a fine work in which an unpalatable subject, an 2 2 2Heinrich Laube, ",Madelon, oder die Romantiker in Paris.' Novelle von Theodor Mundt. Leipzig, bei Wohlbrecht, 1833," Zeitung fur die elegante Welt, Nr. 103 (30.5.1833), 411. 88 incestuous familial relationship, had been handled deftly. Laube commented that even more than "Madelon" this work represented an important progression for Mundt. "Es ist Sonnenschein und Grim, Vogel und frische Luft da, wie ein schwerfalliger Strom hat sich der Styl seine neuen Bahnen gebrochen und schattige angenehme Ufer gesucht. Die kleinen Gedanken haben sich emancipirt und sind selbststandige Satze geworden."224 Though Laube noted that he had condemned Mundt's earlier journalistic style, he observed that Mundt had emancipated himself from this in "Basilisk" and had finally produced a work of great stylistic 4. Ludolf Wienbarg did not serve as an editor for a major journal during the crucial years prior to the ban. Thus he was not in a position to review the latest works of Gutzkow, Mundt and Laube. However, in 1835 he was a standing contributor to the Literarische und kritische Blatter der Borsen-Halle. During this period Wienbarg's opinion of Gutzkow's work was clearly expressed in an article entitled "Lucinde, Schleiermacher und Gutzkow." 2 2 6 Wienbarg Heinrich Laube, ",Der Basilisk, oder Gesichterstudien.' Novelle von Theodor Mundt. Leipzig, bei Georg Wohlbrecht, 1833," Zeitung pr die elegante Welt, Nr. 128 (4.7.1833), 511-512. 225Ibid. Laube's condemnation of Mundt's journalistic style stands in stark contrast to Gutzkow's belief that journalism was an invaluable educational medium. Gutzkow would later refer to himself as a "Feuilletonisten." Karl Gutzkow, In hunter Reihe. Briefe, Skizzen, Novellen (Breslau: Schottlaender, 1878), 209. Heinrich Heine also believed that "Es ist die Zeit des Ideenkampfes, und Journale sind unsere Festungen." Heine quoted in Friedrich Andrae, "Bis unter den Zipfel der Nachtmutze," Die Zeit, Nr. 2 (10.01.1992), 13. 2 2 6This article was also published in Zur neuesten Literatur. Ludolf Wienbarg, "Lucinde, Schleiermacher und Gutzkow," Zur neuesten Literatur (Mannheim: C. Lowenthal, 1835); (Berlin: Aufbau, 1964), 272-280. 89 observed that Gutzkow's writings in the Phonix literature supplement were 'epoch-making' in their importance. Gutzkow was "der jugendliche Templer, der kiihnste Soldat der Freiheit und der anmutigste Priester der Liebe, den Deutschlands Boden tragt."227 Wienbarg defended Gutzkow's desire to make Schleiermacher's Vertraute Briefe on Schlegel's Lucinde known to the public, arguing that he was not motivated by malice or hostility as his critics alleged. Rather, Gutzkow wanted to resurrect Schleiermacher's reputation which had been irreparably harmed by the pietist zealots who wished to claim him as one of their own. Gutzkow saw the true Schleiermacher, whose early writings had established him as the defender of a new doctrine of free love. As Wienbarg observed, "[t]apfrer Gutzkow, du hast dem Andenken Schleiermachers und der Liebe, die ach! so schlecht und ordinar geworden ist in deutschen Landen, dafi sie kaum mehr diesen heiligen zaubervollen Namen verdient, du hast ihnen beiden einen wackern Ritterdienst geleistet."228 Shortly after these flattering remarks appeared, Wienbarg moved to Frankfurt in order to facilitate a closer collaboration with Gutzkow. This led to the creation of their first joint venture, a new literary journal to be entitled Deutsche Revue. The prospectus for the Deutsche Revue entitled "Menzel und die junge Literatur" further underscored the degree of respect which Wienbarg held for Gutzkow. 2 2 9 In the prospectus Wienbarg wrote that he valued 221Ibid., 276. 22SIbid., 278. See Chapter Four for further discussion of the religious implications of this passage. 2 2 9 Ludolf Wienbarg, "Menzel und die junge Literatur. Programm zur deutschen Revue," (Mannheim: C. Lowenthal, 1835); (Berlin: Aufbau, 1964), 281-296. 90 Gutzkow's friendship, unlike Menzel, and recognized that Gutzkow was "ein Vorbild unausgesetzter ideeller Tatigkeit, einer bis zur Durchsichtigkeit wahren, mit allem Zarten und Hohen sympathisierenden Gesinnung...."2 3 0 Wienbarg fiercely defended Gutzkow against Wolfgang Menzel's accusations that Wally was a dangerous and immoral piece of work. Wienbarg wrote of Menzel that [e]r nahm die 'Wally,' einen kurzlich erschienenen Roman Gutzkows zur Hand, knetete daraus einen alarmierenden Popanz, ein Ungeheuer der Irreligiositat und Sittenlosigkeit, und nachdem er, der deutsche Mann, eingangig eine personliche Infamie dem jungen Autor angeschmitzt hatte, gab er dem ganzen monstrosen Geback seiner Hande den Namen Gutzkow, ad libitum junges Deutschland. Warf s darauf zur Zermalmung unter die Hufen seine Rosse. 2 3 1 Wienbarg thus argued strenuously against Menzel's arbitrary dismissal of Gutzkow's entire body of work on the grounds that the spectre of immorality had apparently appeared in Wally. In the final analysis Wienbarg rejected Menzel's critique as stupid and malicious2 3 2 thereby establishing himself as one of Gutzkow's staunchest and most consistent supporters. 5. The foregoing survey of the journalistic exchanges among the so-called Young German authors provides a preliminary overview of the issues which more often than not divided Mundt, Laube, Gutzkow and, to a lesser extent, Wienbarg. Heinrich Laube emphasized the democratic nature of literary production. Al l of the new literature would work together to create a new world order. Literature would thus be the vehicle by which a social ^Ibid., 286. 231Ibid. 232Ibid., 290. 91 transformation would be effected. Because of his belief that all literature was useful Laube welcomed all new author's to contribute to the new literature regardless of their approach. Therefore he commended the works of Mundt, Wienbarg's travel novella, and the works of Gutzkow, because of each author's willingness to tackle new and controversial topics. Whereas Laube consistently emphasized the democratic nature of literary production, Karl Gutzkow tended to reject all but the most serious of the new literature. Gutzkow's journalistic efforts returned constantly to the theme of substance over noise. Gutzkow too believed that the new literature was building a new society; however, he did not believe that the work of literary dilettantes had any place in the creation of that new world. Only the literature that was produced with the most elegant style and with the greatest attention to the role of the author as a creator of artistic truths could help the world move forward. Emancipation would not come overnight and neither would it be facilitated by the noisy outpourings of the vast majority of Gutzkow's contemporaries. With the principle of substance over noise firmly in mind, Gutzkow thus condemned the work of Laube for its dilettantism and of Mundt for its failure to contribute anything but noise. The only exception to this pattern of criticism concerned Mundt's Madonna which Gutzkow commended precisely for its boldness and willingness to proffer an alternate artistic reality. With respect to Wienbarg, Gutzkow's views are less easy to pinpoint. Certainly he seemed to hold Wienbarg in a higher regard than the other so-called Young Germans, but his comments appeared to be tainted by personal jealousy making it difficult for him to judge clearly the artistic merits of Wienbarg's writings. Gutzkow was insistent that the new literature must create entirely new and challenging realities. Theodor Mundt was the precise opposite of Gutzkow. Mundt's journal articles reveal 92 a cautious approach. Criticism must not be too destructive (as opposed to Gutzkow's belief that criticism must be surgically applied to destroy the remnants of the old world), characterizations should not venture beyond the realm of possibility, women must remain feminine, and authors must take care to ensure that their works did not bring unnecessary criticism upon the new literature. Mundt thus refused to endorse the works of either Gutzkow or Laube, remained reserved about Wienbarg especially as he moved closer to Gutzkow, and enthusiastically endorsed only Kuhne whose work Gutzkow had rejected out of hand. Because Ludolf Wienbarg produced very few articles and did not review the works of the other so-called Young Germans, it is not possible to assess his attitudes toward each of the other authors from this source. However, his attitude toward Gutzkow was evident in his strident defence of the latter's work on Schleiermacher's Vertraute Briefe. Wienbarg considered Gutzkow's work to be epoch-making in its importance and viewed Gutzkow himself as one of the greatest defenders of German freedom. Wienbarg was also one of the few men to defend Gutzkow's Wally in print against the accusations of immorality levelled by Wolfgang Menzel. To substantiate the preliminary assessments offered above on the differing agendas of Karl Gutzkow, Heinrich Laube, Theodor Mundt, and Ludolf Wienbarg, it is necessary to probe their major works more deeply. In addition, it is important to move from the personal exchanges among the four men to consider more substantive issues. Personal exchanges might reveal recurrent themes in each man's thinking, but they were frequently subject to personal rivalries and professional jealousies which detract from their reliability. The remaining chapters will consider the positions of the so-called Young German authors on several of the substantive 93 socio-political issues with which their biographers frequently link them. Jeffrey Sammons notes that most Young German scholarship has focussed upon similar themes: "the relationship of literature to life and its prophetic mission, the emancipation of women, religious liberalism and Saint-Simonianism."233 For purposes of clarity this study will divide these key socio-political questions into three separate issues: the emancipation of women; religious emancipation, including the issue of Saint-Simonianism; and political emancipation, which encompasses the relationship of literature to life. However, it should be emphasized that not all of the 'Young Germans' made such a clear separation. For Wienbarg in particular the three problems were synonymous. More importantly, among the 'Young German' authors who did see these as separate issues there was significant disagreement regarding the relative importance of each question and the means by which these goals would be reached. The remainder of this study will examine the widely divergent positions of the so-called Young Germans on questions of female, religious, and political emancipation. Jeffrey L . Sammons, Six Essays on the Young German Novel (Chapel Hill , N C : University of North Carolina Press, 1972), 29. 94 CHAPTER THREE: The Question of Female Emancipation in the Works of the 'Young German' Authors Women figure prominently in the journals and novels of the Young Germans. The so-called Young Germans frequently reviewed the works of prominent female writers. Their journals also offered commentaries on the position of women in society and female characters were common in their novels. Women thus played a variety of significant roles for the writers of 'Young Germany.' Along the way, Gutzkow, Laube, Mundt and Wienbarg provide a fascinating, if often contradictory, look at the place of women in Vormdrz society and the broader question of female emancipation. Perhaps most surprising is the generally sympathetic treatment accorded to women as a whole and to women writers in particular by the so-called Young Germans.234 This conflicts with the assertions of several recent historical studies on the position of women in Vormdrz society. These studies have argued that any form of female Three female contemporaries figure most prominently in the works of the Young German authors. These women were Rahel Varnhagen von Ense who was born Rahel Levin (1771), married Karl August Varnhagen von Ense in 1814, and died in Berlin in 1833; Charlotte Stieglitz, born Charlotte Willhoft (1806), married the writer Heinrich Stieglitz in 1828, and committed suicide on December 29, 1834; and Bettina von Arnim who was born Katherina Elisabetha von Brentano (1785), the granddaughter of Sophie Laroche, married Achim von Arnim in 1811, and died in 1859. The Young Germans counted the emergence of these women among the most important happenings of their age. Gutzkow noted in 1839 that "wer da erwagt die akademische Bildung, die Traumerei einer doktrinellen Erziehung, die Julirevolution, die polnische, die erstickten und gebundenen revolutionaren Krafte, die neue soziale franzosische Philosophie, die Lamennaissche Verbindung der Religion mit der Politik, die Grundziige einer neuen Gesellschaft durch den Saint-Simonismus, Rahel, Bettina, den Tod der Stieglitz, der hat der Blitze genug in der Hand, die in der schwiilen Atmosphare Deutschlands ziinden muBten." Karl Gutzkow, Vergangenheit und Gegenwart, 1830-1838, (Hamburg: Hoffmann & Campe, 1839), GWIII, 186-187. 95 emancipation was viewed with deep suspicion during the Vormdrz era, even among relatively progressive thinkers such as G.W.F. Hegel (1770-1831).235 The preceding assessments appear to be substantiated by the restrictive laws which confronted the women of the Vormdrz. For example, the Prussian Civil Code made it illegal for women to take part in public meetings during the nineteenth century, a provision which clearly demonstrates the deep-rooted suspicion that greeted any sign of a female public sphere. Those women who did attempt to blend the traditional female vocation of marriage and family with more individually satisfying lives, many of which revolved around literary careers, found a series of obstacles confronting them. Rahel Varnhagen noted in an 1819 letter to her sister: For men employment is, at least in their own eyes, not only to be regarded as important, but [it] is also something which flatters their ambition and gives them a chance to get on, whilst being inspired by social contact; we only ever have before us the fragments which pull us down, the small tasks and services which must relate to our husband's standing and needs.... Of course one loves, shares and cherishes the wishes of one's own family, submits to them, makes them one's greatest worry and most pressing preoccupation. But they cannot fulfil us, rally us, rest us in readiness to further activity and suffering. Nor can they strengthen and invigorate us throughout our lives. 2 3 6 It is therefore not surprising to discover that historical studies devoted to the female writers of the Vormdrz have generally concluded that women were either dismissed, viewed with suspicion, or treated with outright contempt. References from Friedrich Schiller's circle to Ute Frevert confirms this view noting that women such as Sophie Mereau, Caroline Michaelis and Dorothea Mendelssohn were "outsiders, lone warriors, and yet also products of a society barely able to conceal the systematic contradiction between its programme of universal human rights and its insistence on a specific 'female estate' unaffected by this programme." Ute Frevert, Women in German History: From Bourgeois Emancipation to Sexual Liberation (Oxford: Berg, 1989), 60. 2 3 6Rahel Varnhagen von Ense quoted in ibid., 56-57. 96 Caroline Michaelis (Schlegel-Schelling) as "Dame Lucifer" and "Evil One" seem to underline this deep-rooted antipathy towards female writers.2 3 7 Writing by and for women is a genre which has recently attracted the attention of numerous contemporary scholars. In the early 1980s a new analytical typology, 'gynocriticism,' was created in order to undertake "a sustained investigation of literature by women,... the study of women as writers,... the history, styles, themes, genres, and structures of writing by women, the psychodynamics of female literary creativity, the trajectory of the individual or collective female career, and the evolution and laws of a female literary tradition."238 Most recently gynocriticism has been used to evaluate the contributions of and attitudes towards women's literary production during the Biedermeier period. 2 3 9 These scholars reached several conclusions about the female writers of the Vormdrz. Most importantly, Katherine Goodman and Edith Waldstein believe that women writers were only accepted in a few limited genres, in particular letter writing, fairy tales, moral weeklies, and family novels. Here women were condoned precisely because their lack of education and worldly experience made their writing less vulnerable to hypocrisy and ulterior motives. Women seemed to represent a "natural German style"2 4 0 closer to Geist than Bildung. Women apparently wrote only in popular and 2 3 7See Sara Friedrichsmeyer, "Caroline Schlegel-Schelling: ' A Good Woman and no Heroine,'" in Katherine R. Goodman and Edith Waldstein, eds., In the Shadow of Olympus: German Women Writers Around 1800 (New York: State University of New York Press, Albany, 1992), 134. 2 3 8Elaine Showalter, "Feminist Criticism in the Wilderness," Critical Inquiry 8:2 (Winter 1981), 184-185. ^Goodman and Waldstein, In the Shadow of Olympus. 240Ibid, 6-7; here the authors are paraphrasing Christian Furchtegott Gellert (1715-97 non-esoteric forms; thus Goodman concludes that "while women had not been educated in traditional 'high' forms of literature, when forms and themes emerged in which they felt competent they were not shy to set pen to paper."241 Ute Frevert provides additional evidence in support of this argument when she observes that even though Sophie Laroche 2 4 2 stepped beyond the traditional female sphere with her literary career "her novels [were nevertheless] aimed at bourgeois women and girls, her letters and educational articles extolled self-contentment and the virtuous fulfilment of duty."2 4 3 Furthermore, the literary genres open to and popular with women were only marginally respectable, thus women generally received worse reviews than their male counterparts and no critical acclaim. Finally, Goodman and Waldstein conclude that even in the relatively supportive and pro-feminine environment of the romantic school of writers whose goal it was to blend the "perfection of masculinity and femininity into humanity as a whole," 2 4 4 women were given only a relatively minor role in 1769) and his manual on how to write letters. Gellert was an eighteenth century novelist whose collection of fables Fabeln und Erzdhlungen (1746/1748) became famous throughout German-speaking Europe for its effective critique of common character flaws. Gellert also wrote Das Leben der schwedischen Grdfin von G** (1747-1748) one of the first novels to place a woman at the centre of its plot. 2AlIbid, 8. Emphasis added. 2 4 2Sophie Laroche (1730-1807) gained fame during her early years as a letter-writer but following the death of her husband in 1788 argued strongly in favour of socio-economic independence for women; Frevert, Women in German History, 44. Laroche was the grandmother of Bettina von Arnim, a female writer whose works several of the Young Germans considered to be deeply influential. 243Ibid., 50. 2 4 4Goodman and Waldstein, In the Shadow of Olympus, 9-11; the reference to the Romantic School is drawn specifically from the work of Friedrich Schlegel. 98 literary production. The only place where a few select women were able to play a leading role during the Biedermeier era was within Salon culture. Frevert notes that within the culture of the salon it was possible for the "normal social barriers between the aristocracy and the bourgeoisie, Jews and Christians, men of letters and merchants, officers and civilians [to be] blurred; women too had the chance to be accepted as individuals and to win respect."245 These general assumptions concerning the marginal place of women writers appear to be borne out when one confronts the almost total absence of literature by women in the literary histories of the Vormdrz. Ernest K . Bramsted's Aristocracy and the Middle Classes in Germany: Social Types in German Literature 1830-1900, does not mention women writers despite devoting an entire chapter to the family journal, 2 4 6 a format which certainly fits into Goodman and Waldstein's list of the genres to which women felt comfortable contributing. Indeed Waldstein and Goodman go to some length to discuss the involvement of women in the production of such journals, not only as contributing writers but also, in the case of Sophie Laroche, as an editor.2 4 7 Bramsted's only mention of prominent women is a one-line reference to the salon of Rahel Varnhagen von Ense. Most interesting of all was the fact that even though Bramsted attempted to recreate common social types in literature, he evidently did not consider women to be a social type worthy of reconstruction. The argument might be made, 2 4 5Frevert, Women in German History, 55. 2 4 6Ernest K . Bramsted, Aristocracy and the Middle Classes in Germany: Social Types in German Literature 1830-1900, rev. ed. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1964), 200-227. 2 4 7Goodman and Waldstein, In the Shadow of Olympus, 7-8. 99 however, that Bramsted merely reflected the assumptions of his own era, given that his study was originally published in 1937. The same cannot be said for Peter Hohendahl whose Building a National Literature: The Case of Germany 1830-1870 has been acclaimed as a major achievement in literary history. Again one finds no mention of literature by the women writers of the Vormdrz in Hohendahl's study. Further, though he attempts to recreate the institutional structures which determined the status of writers and their works, Hohendahl does not even mention salon culture. Thus this avenue for considering women's literary expression is closed off. 2 4 8 In addition to the recent scholarship on female literary production during the Vormdrz era, a considerable volume of contemporary scholarship has been devoted to examining the nature of social change and gender roles during the Vormdrz. Scholars have paid particular attention to the role and place of the new bourgeoisie and to the habits, wishes, and goals of this group. From this research it is possible to reconstruct the Biedermeier female sphere in some detail. At a time when men were increasingly finding a world beyond the narrow sphere of home and work women remained tied to the more traditional domain of Kinder, Ktiche und Kirche. Ute Frevert has argued that "all those areas, such as education and individual achievement, which endowed the bourgeoisie with self-confidence and conviction, shut women out. They worked quietly and unobtrusively in the home and family, and only now and then, on their husbands' arms, did they decorate a ball or concert with their pleasing appearance."249 2 4 8Peter Uwe Hohendahl, Building a National Literature: The Case of Germany, transl. Renate Baron Franciscono (Ithaca, N Y : Cornell University Press, 1989). 249Frevert, Women in German History, 34. 100 Frevert further argues that only through marriage and motherhood could women achieve anything worthwhile and gain any influence; yet even here Section 184 of the Prussian Civil Code mandated that the man was the head of the household and all decisions regarding the conjugal home were his and his alone.2 5 0 Frevert cites several examples of women, among them Rahel Varnhagen von Ense and Sophie Laroche, who ultimately bowed to the power of tradition despite having attempted to assert their own identity beyond the prescribed areas of home and family. Frevert argues that the so-called Biedermeier period was even less tolerant of the possibility of a women's public sphere than the period before 1815. The reaction to the Napoleonic occupation was to cling even more tightly to traditional male and female roles. According to Frevert ...male and female preserves were drawn more and more sharply, and the catalogue of womanly duties regulated down to the finest detail... The model of the family and marriage that emerged fitted neatly into the new political climate of Restoration, and drew on the strict gender-specific differentiation of roles and characters of the pre-Romantic age without, however, incorporating the products of the Enlightenment and doctrine of natural laws. 2 5 1 Lia Secci has argued that there was no substantial lessening of these attitudes until the revolutions of 1848 at which time there was a brief interregnum during which it was permissible for women to enter into the public sphere. Following the failure of 1848, however, many exclusively female organizations disbanded and the voice of women in the public sphere Ibid., 42-43. lIbid, 63. 101 was noticeably quietened. Given that the arguments of the preceding historians have been drawn primarily from the literature produced during the Biedermeier period, it would seem reasonable to assume that the 'Young Germans' would reflect these attitudes. The 'Young Germans' might be expected to treat women writers as trivial and peripheral to the main literary tradition or ignore them altogether; to write poor reviews of works by women; to deny that women were capable of 'high' literature. In addition, they should reflect many of the Biedermeier attitudes towards the role and place of women in their female characterizations. The works of the Young German writers do provide insights into all of the issues raised by Frevert, Waldstein and others, yet the opinions they express seldom support the assumptions of contemporary historians regarding Biedermeier attitudes towards the social position of women. Eda Sagarra has interpreted the unusual Young German attitudes towards women as a sign that though "feminism was rare in Germany... the Young German movement... proved an interesting if short-lived exception to this rule." 2 5 3 Certainly all of the so-called Young Germans were aware of the issues concerning female emancipation. Even so, it is not possible to go as far as Sagarra and label all of the 2 5 2 L i a Secci, "German Women Writers and the Revolution of 1848," in J.C. Fout, ed. German Women in the Nineteenth Century (New York: Holmes and Meier, 1984), 151-171. 2 5 3 Eda Sagarra, Tradition and Revolution: German Literature and Society, J830-J890 (London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1971), 20. Sagarra bases this claim primarily upon the fact that she believes the 'Young Germans' were Saint-Simonians. Under the influence of Barthelemy Prosper Enfantin (1790-1864) the Saint-Simonians argued that man and woman together make up the ideal social individual. They also advocated marriage based on free choice, love, and personal preference and insisted that marriage must meet the physical needs of both man and woman equally. 102 'Young Germans' as early feminists. The attitudes which they expressed towards their female contemporaries and the attributes which they incorporated into their fictional female characterizations varied widely, from the fairly traditional views identified by Frevert and others to ideas which seem to approach the opinion expressed by Sagarra. 1. Two female contemporaries featured prominently in the work of Theodor Mundt: Charlotte Stieglitz and Bettina von Arnim. Mundt was deeply affected by the actions of Stieglitz, a writer and poet who committed suicide in order to inspire her writer-husband Heinrich to break out of his tedious existence and produce a truly monumental literary work. Charlotte Stieglitz' diary was excerpted in Theodor Mundt's Literarischer Zodiacus shortly after her death. In his introduction to the diary Mundt praised Stieglitz as a product of the newest ideas of the time and added that she represented everything that was great and notable about the age.2 5 4 This introduction also served to give notice of Mundt's forthcoming biography of Stieglitz entitled Charlotte Stieglitz. Ein Denkmal. Even the short excerpts of Stieglitz' diary which Mundt provided revealed a complex woman whose concerns ranged from the question of women's emancipation to the nature of Christianity, and who fiercely defended her right to be treated as an individual. Stieglitz also observed that the apparent discrepancy between male and female intellectual capacity was simply a product of the fact that "[w]enn der arme Junge langst schon iiber seinen Biichern schwitzen muJ3, dann lehnt das Madelchen sich faullenzend zum Fenster hinaus und guckt im dolce far niente sich das Leben 2 5 4Theodor Mundt, "Charlotte Stieglitz," Literarischer Zodiacus (July 1835), 64. 103 und die Welt an!" Given this state of affairs, Stieglitz wondered when the emancipation of women might ever be achieved. Despite Goodman and Waldstein's hypothesis that women did not tackle esoteric topics, Stieglitz's diary contained a series of comments on the role of Christianity in society. She observed that the stupid people did not truly understand Christianity. Al l since Socrates had pointed to a hereafter but few realized that in its Christian form religion need not be a mysterious and intimidating institution. Christianity was simply the global domination of mercy, inner strength and understanding. Stieglitz also remarked pessimistically on the prospects for a successful German nationalist movement in her diary. Stieglitz believed that it was the nature of the German to be led about by the hand, ever willing to please his master. Likening the true German to a dog, Stieglitz observed: Der Hund ist der achte Deutsche. Er bellt, springt an, laBt sich nicht schrecken durch die Peitsche, springt wieder an, dreht sich um sich selbst herum, gleichsam um sich zu ziigeln und iibriggroBen Eifer an sich zu halten.... Der Hund ist das deutsche Thier.... Der Hund ist, woraus der Mensch am meisten machen kann, und seine Aehnlichkeit ist gemiithlich. Was war ***, als der treue Hund Goethes? — Der Hund giebt seine Natur auf und schlieBt sich lieber an den Menschen. Er ist groBmuthig, laBt sich von kleinen Kindern necken, geht lieber hinweg, als daB er ihnen was zu Leide thate. Es ware eine Aufgabe: die Philosophic des Hundes!2 5 6 Until this willingness to be dominated ended, Stieglitz saw little hope for a successful mIbUL, 66. 256Ibid, 67; the name of the person whom Stieglitz labelled "das treue Hund Goethes" was omitted from Mundt's reprint of the diary, either by Mundt or the Vorzensur. It would appear likely, however, that the person to whom Stieglitz referred was Bettina von Arnim given that the diary was written around the time that the controversy over Arnim's Goethes Briejwechsel mit einem Kind was raging. 104 nationalist movement. Of all the excerpts provided by Mundt the most interesting was a letter from Stieglitz to a Professor Scheidler in Kissingen in which she responded to Scheidler's commentary on one of her works. The professor had evidently referred to her as 'ein Stiickchen Rahel.' Stieglitz' response read as a defence of individuality as powerful as any undertaken by Mundt himself. Stieglitz remarked that she personally never viewed people as part of a crowd, for the most valuable attribute of humanity was variety. While acknowledging the greatness of Rahel and the obviously complimentary tone in which the comment had been intended, Stieglitz added that Ich fur mein Theil will lieber eine Butter- oder Ganseblume sein und mich von der ersten hungrigen Ziege mit Kopf und Kraut verzehren lassen, wenn ich nur einmal ein Ganzes dagewesen bin; nur kein Blatt einer Rose oder Stengel eines Lotos! — Und Gott sei Dank! in dieser wunderbar reichen Menschenwelt giebt es auch Sonnenblumen und Nachtschatten, Dornen und Disteln dicht neben einander.... Ich verstehe und erkenne die Menschen nur als Individualitaten.257 Stieglitz thus acknowledged that she would rather be a lowly buttercup or daisy than be remembered as a single petal of a greater flower. Moreover, one of mankind's greatest gifts was the gift of individuality. The world should celebrate its individualism and not encourage everyone to emulate a few great figures. Mundt offered these diary excerpts without additional comment but it was clear that he viewed Charlotte Stieglitz as a remarkable example of the literary capabilities of contemporary women. A similar attitude was evident in Mundt's encounter with the work of Bettina von Arnim. Von Arnim's Goethes Briefwechsel mit einem Kind (1835) created an enormous 257Ibid., 68. The letter was dated September 27, 1834. 105 controversy when it was first published. Many critics rejected the work outright arguing that she had violated a sacred trust by writing of her affair with Goethe.2 5 8 Though Mundt did not review the work personally in Literarischer Zodiacus, he did publish a review written by Ferdinand Gustav Kuhne 2 5 9 and in the subsequent month's Zodiacallichter offered his own opinion on the controversy. Kuhne's unusually long five-page review appeared in the April 1835 issue of Zodiacus260 The majority of the review was devoted to an examination of Bettina von Arnim's character and motivation rather than her literary talent. He did, however, note that Bettina's literary pedigree was solid, as she was the sister of Clemens Brentano and grand-daughter of Sophie Laroche. Kuhne concluded that her book was surprisingly illustrative of the complexity and breadth of Goethe's work. 2 6 1 Evidently Kuhne's relatively sympathetic review branded him as pro-Bettina and by extension anti-Goethe, and prompted such a storm of protest that Mundt felt compelled to address the issue himself the following month. The appearance of Bettina's book had divided Berlin into two camps, those who enthusiastically hated the book and those who 2 5 8Wolfgang Menzel argued that Bettina's work was fundamentally unfeminine and violated the basic elements of trust and decency; quoted in Karl Gutzkow, "Charlotte Stieglitz. Ein Denkmal," Deutsche Revue, Nr. 1 (1.12.1835), 40. 2 5 9Kuhne worked closely with Mundt on Literarischer Zodiacus for several years. After Zodiacus ceased production in 1836 Kuhne went on to a successful career as editor of Lewald's Europa. 2 6 0The usual length of reviews in Literarischer Zodiacus was two to three pages. Only Gutzkow's Wally, die Zweiflerin and Kuhne's Eine Quarantdne im Irrenhause received reviews approaching the length devoted to von Arnim's work. 2 6 1Friedrich G. Kuhne, "Goethes Briefwechsel mit einem Kinde. Seinem Denkmal," Literarischer Zodiacus (April 1835), 237-243. 106 enthusiastically embraced it. Though Mundt did not state which side he favoured, his opinion was evident in the way in which he described Bettina: "den genialen, romantischen, mystischen, prophetischen, wundersam, herumirrlichtelirenden Kobold Bettina, die Sibylle der romantischen Literaturperiode, und doch das von herzinniger Liebe gequalte Kind Goethe's."2 6 2 Mundt observed that the debate had gone too far for an objective critique to make any difference so instead Zodiacus would simply publish the battle reports from each side. He did take this opportunity to launch a savage attack on a correspondent for the Blatter fur literarische Unterhaltung who, despite praising the original femininity of Bettina's work, had used his critique to dismiss all of the pro-Bettina forces as "unwiirdiges Gesindel."2 6 3 Mundt's retort was brief and pointed: "[wjarum, warum in aller Welt, Sie bdser Orthodoxer? Kann man nicht, bei aller groBen Verehrung fur Goethe, abweichende Ansichten haben iiber seine Bedeutung fur die nachstliegende Zeit. . .?" 2 6 4 In this response one sees Mundt's ongoing insistence on the right to express divergent opinions, the same insistence which led him in the November 1835 edition of Zodiacus \o condemn those who spoke of a 'Young German school' of writers.265 Mundt's encounters with his female contemporaries demonstrate that he was certainly tolerant of female writers. Stieglitz' work in particular represented everything that was new and exciting about his age. Bettina's work, though fundamentally representative of the older 2 6 2Theodor Mundt, "Zodiacallichter," Literarischer Zodiacus (May 1835), 328. 26SIbid, 329. ™Ibid 2 6 5Theodor Mundt, "Feuilleton," Literarischer Zodiacus (November 1835), 379. 107 Romantic school of waiting, was nonetheless valuable since it challenged the existing consensus on Goethe. Turning to the female characters which Mundt created in his novels, one finds a similar challenge to the accepted definitions of femininity and the female role. This was most clearly evident in Mundt's controversial novel Madonna: Unterhaltungen mit einer Heiligen. Mundt's Madonna is a highly uneven work, a peculiar mixture of fact and fiction, where key figures from the past and present meet and interact with fictional characters and fictional situations created by the author. The ostensible centre of the story revolved around Mundt's conversations with a woman named Maria (Madonna, to whom the title refers) whose life story was interwoven throughout the narrative.266 However, Maria's life story was merely a stepping stone from which Mundt could tackle a variety of diverse topics including the potential emancipation of women. E . M . Butler claimed that Maria was a real person with whom Mundt had a brief affair during his travels in Bohemia in the summer of 1834, an affair which left him racked with guilt since his true love, Charlotte Stieglitz, remained unaware of the liaison. However, she did not provide any substantive evidence supporting the existence of such a person beyond a vague statement that she believed the story to be true; E . M . Butler, The Saint Simonian Religion in Germany. A Study of the Young German Movement, 2 n d Edition (New York: Howard Fertig, 1968), 335-336. In fact, the life of Maria, who was abandoned by uncaring parents at a young age after a rigorous indoctrination into the Catholic faith, and was subsequently raised by a worldly and irreligious Aunt who provided her with an expensive education, then attempted to make Maria the mistress of an older man, is remarkably similar to the life of Bettina von Arnim. Von Arnim was abandoned to an Ursuline convent, raised by her grandmother Sophie Laroche, from age thirteen to twenty-six, and became Goethe's mistress while she was still quite young. Mundt's ongoing fascination with Bettina, was evidenced by a series of Literarischer Zodiacus articles which, beginning in January 1835, gave notice that Bettina's book was completed and would be available to the public soon. Thus it seems to be far more likely that Maria's life was in fact based on the life of Bettina. 108 By far the most interesting, if also the most frustrating, insights into Mundt's attitudes towards emancipation were revealed in a chapter entitled "Bohemiconymphomachia."267 The stated intent of this section was to reveal the mysteries of the women of Prague, women who, according to Mundt, reflected the very essence of mysticism and sensuality.268 Evidently Mundt believed that the key to the mysteries of the women of Prague could be found in a story that had first been captured in a sentimental fashion by the poet Egon Ebert—a story about the eighth-century Bohemian Handmaidens' War. 2 6 9 It was then that the only true exploration of the consequences of the emancipation of women had taken place. In his own time, Mundt argued that the issue of female emancipation had been trapped in the philosophical debate over Saint Simonianism, preventing an examination of the real issues surrounding the question of emancipation.270 Mundt thus endeavoured to retell the story of the Handmaidens' War in a letter to Maria so that the contemporary reader could ponder the lessons therein. In the retelling of this story many of Mundt's opinions on women and on emancipation were clearly evident. Theodor Mundt, Madonna: Unterhaltungen mit einer Heiligen (Leipzig: Gebriider Reichenbach, 1835), 302-343. This section was published in its entirety under the title "Unterhaltungen in Prag" in the January 1835 issue of Literarischer Zodiacus as a way to publicize the forthcoming release of Mundt's book. The voice of the author is omnipresent in this section which begins "[i]ch beschlofj, um mich fur die Langeweile des Egon Ebert'schen Magdekriegs zu rachen, mir selbst einen zu Papiere zu bringen...." Ibid., 301. 2 6 8Mundt, Madonna, 299; Mundt believed that it was only possible to tell this story while in Prague where he was free of the restrictions imposed by the censor. 2 6 9Literally "an den Bdhmischen Magdekrieg." 210Mundt, Madonna, 301. 109 The Bohemian Handmaidens' War was triggered by the death of the queen of Bohemia, Libussa, a woman who was evidently well-educated, deeply intelligent, and loved by all of the women of Bohemia for her efforts to improve their lives. Libussa had created an association to educate young girls and free them from the stultifying assumptions of their parents. Though Libussa was profoundly mourned by some, others had celebrated the end of the unnatural rule of a woman. Among those who celebrated Libussa's death was her husband, Przemysl, who was relieved that he was finally free of his brilliant wife, who had so often made him feel inadequate because of her mastery of complex philosophical topics. Together Przemysl and his friend Hinchvoch celebrated their lack of Geist by ordering the disbanding of Libussa's association for women and thereby giving men complete freedom from educated women. Przemysl instructed the women to return to their fathers' houses, pay attention to their spinning wheels, and help their mothers to cook and clean. "Was habt ihr mit den Kunsten zu schaffen und mit der Wahrsagung und mit der Wissenschaft der Pflanzen und Krauter. Ihr seid arme Leute Kind. Geht! Geht!" 2 7 1 However, having tasted freedom the young women could not return to the stifling world of their parents, thus they turned to Wlasta, Libussa's handmaid, to lead them to their freedom. Wlasta rallied the women with a rousing speech concerning the value of freedom and the necessity of fighting to defend the ideals of liberty; her speech concluded with the revolutionary cry of "[l]iberte pour toutes les femmes!"272 The next sequence of events which Mundt narrated demonstrated the mixture of lIbid, 309. *Cited in French in Mundt's original text; ibid, 312. 110 understanding and cynicism with which he regarded female emancipation. Following her speech about the value of liberty the spirit of Libussa entered the body of Wlasta and told the women about the future of women's emancipation. The struggle for women's freedom would be marked by great calamities, eternal wars, and titanic despair. Wlasta's lifetime would be an era of love, but still women would remain unfree. The next centuries would bring pious images of young German women praying in dark cells, enraptured women who had surrendered themselves to the power of God. Yet still women would not be free, for the world of the Church was the realm of great associations of men, associations which continued to debate whether or not women were individuals. Next would come Joan of Arc, yet she would be denied even by the women of her era since those women had no fatherland and thus could not understand how Joan could be possessed by the spirit of the fatherland.273 The following years would see the emergence of the bourgeois era, an era which would invest women with considerable value. They would knit, sew, pour tea, and speak pleasantly; yet they would not be free. In the bourgeois era they would be dominated by associations of free men. Looking further forward still Wlasta told of a man named Hippel 2 7 4 who believed that women should have a fatherland, a place in the state, and a real place in free open associations. Hippel was 2 7 3The use of the term Vaterland, though clearly inappropriate in the time of Joan of Arc, was Mundt's. 2 7 4Theodor Gottlieb von Hippel (1741-1796) was the administrator of the territory of Danzig in the late 1700s. His work Ueber die biirgerliche Verbesserung der Weiber (1792) argued that all of the supposed weaknesses of women were actually creations of the society in which they lived. Hippel thus called for the education of women to prepare them to accept their legitimate civil rights and responsibilities. Hippel's work was recently published in English under the title On Improving the Status of Women, ed. T.F. Sellner (Detroit: 1979). I l l thus the first man truly inspired by the spirit of liberalism. Finally, the spirit of Libussa told the women of the culmination of their quest. She told of events in Paris among a group of men who called themselves Saint-Simonians. What the liberals had conceived and Hippel had written, the Saint-Simonians would implement. In Paris, Enfantin awaited a truly free woman who would be taken into the society of men to create "eine gesellschaftliche Person, das ist nicht mehr der Mann allein, sondern Mann und Frau, und alle Geschafte des Lebens werden daher paarweise verrichtet."275 Mundt's interpretation of the struggle for emancipation was interesting for several reasons. It revealed a clear understanding of the key issues facing women in their attempt to gain recognition as equals. Mundt's depiction of the subordinate role offered to women by the Church hierarchy was, at least in the case of the Catholic women's orders, an accurate assessment.276 While acknowledging that the acceptance of women's orders within the Church was an important step, Mundt still recognized that the continuing subordination of those orders meant that this could not be viewed as a major step in the quest for emancipation. Mundt's analysis of the problems confronting women during the bourgeois era seems remarkably progressive. He recognized the stultifying effect of bourgeois conventions on women and did not assume that because bourgeois men had gained some freedoms that women had automatically been empowered too. Mundt's account focussed attention upon the rigorous expectations placed upon women, the necessity of being educated but only within a sharply 2 7 5Mundt, Madonna, 320. 2 7 6 Given the time period in question (prior to the appearance of Joan of Arc during the Hundred Years War) Mundt must have been referring to the Catholic Church. 112 confined domain, the endless social obligations, and the over-riding awareness that the bourgeois public sphere was an exclusively male preserve. Mundt also introduced the ideas of Hippel, Saint-Simon and Enfantin, all of whom believed that a genuine equality of men and women was possible. By introducing the ideas of the Saint Simonians, Mundt appeared to acknowledge that real emancipation might soon be realized. After providing an overview of the fate of women's emancipation, Mundt returned to the story of the Bohemian Handmaidens' War. Under the leadership of Libussa, the women determined that they needed to demonstrate their new-found freedom and confidence by choosing their own mates. Wlasta chose Przemysl but was dismissed by him—told to return to her handmaid's duties and pray for forgiveness for her impudence. Wlasta then vowed vengeance on all men: Auf, auf, zur Rache, ihr Schwestern! rief sie aus. Zur Rache an alien Mannern! Kein einziges dieser Ungeheuer darf am Leben bleiben, so lange wir bdhmischen Magde walten in diesem Lande! Zur Rache, zu den Waffen! Jede suche sich ihre Waffe, damit wir geriistet sind!... Jetzt will ich euch sagen vom freien Weibe, was es ist! Das freie Weib ist die Amazone, die gegen die Manner ficht! Die Amazone, mit Schwert und Bogen und Pfeil, ein freies Weib! Sie ist unabhangig, sie streitet fur ihre Freiheit gegen die Manner! 2 7 7 The end of this speech also marked the end of the narrator's letter to Maria. A simple narrative told the remainder of the story. The war encompassed the whole land as the women rose up against their husbands and fathers, building their own castle, and proclaiming the independence of their state, with Wlasta as its queen. Next they passed an Amazonian edict which ordered that every male child born have his right hand cut off and right eye poked out to make him unfit 2 7 7Mundt, Madonna, 337. 113 for battle. Finally, the women defeated the men on the battlefield and instituted an ethical-social revolution which made the men entirely subordinate to the women. The rule of Wlasta was so onerous that the males eventually revolted and engaged the women in battle once more. Eventually, after a horrendous battle, the biblical word came down: "Er soil Dein Herr sein! und die Jungfrauen, die nicht durch das Schwert fielen, wurden geheirathet, und gelobten Treue und Gehorsam, und ein sanftes Gemuth."2 7 8 At this point the narrative ended without further explanation.279 Mundt never clarified his motives in producing this piece. In later years, he did not mention Madonna or his reasoning when he wrote it, likely due to his anxiety concerning his Young German connections. Yet Mundt chose to excerpt this section in its entirety in Literarischer Zodiacus to announce the forthcoming publication of Madonna. Thus one can reasonably conclude that he considered the piece to be of great interest to his audience.280 However, what remains unclear is how Mundt intended this material to be received. According to a superficial reading Mundt was anxious to reveal the foolhardiness of any attempt to achieve women's emancipation. After all, the fate of the Bohemian handmaidens can hardly be considered encouraging. E . M . Butler thus concluded that this piece was evidence of Mundt's belief in the essential absurdity of feminism.281 Yet it was not the rule of women as such which 21*Ibid, 341-342. 219Ibid, 343. 2 8 0 Only one additional chapter was excerpted during Mundt's years as editor of Zodiacus, that being the introductory "Posthorn Symphonie," an enthusiastic call for action within the new literature. 2 8 Sutler, The Saint-Simonian Religion, 356. 114 led to their downfall; it was the onerous and tyrannical regulations imposed by Wlasta. As such the story could also be interpreted as a general condemnation of dictatorship, rather than a particular attack on the rule of women. It was only when the women attempted to reduce all men to complete subservience that their rule collapsed. While his account of the struggle for the emancipation of women was admirable in its scope, Mundt's portrayal of the character of Wlasta was problematic. At one level, Mundt acknowledged the basic intelligence of Wlasta and certainly presented a flattering picture of her organizational and military talents. Yet at another level, the character was frustratingly under-developed. The only motive given for her behaviour was a fierce sense of loyalty to Libussa; Mundt failed utterly to develop any other aspect of Wlasta's personality or to offer any insight into her thoughts and feelings. In general Mundt appeared to be deliberately inflating those parts of Wlasta's personality which were guaranteed to provoke the reader. Indeed, as in much of Mundt's work, this might have been his intention—to highlight interesting phenomena and to provoke discussion, rather than offer any concrete suggestions for change. Similar inconsistencies are evident in the characterization of Maria, the ostensible heroine of the novel. Maria spoke directly to the reader only twice during the novel. On the first occasion Maria told her life story in a letter entitled 'Confessions of a Worldly Soul. ' 2 8 2 On the final occasion she revealed the outcome of a particular story begun in the earlier letter. Maria told a relatively straightforward story, chronologically ordered, of her life from childhood to adulthood. The early years of her childhood had been shaped by unfeeling parents 2 8 2The title of this section, "Bekenntnisse einer weltlichen Seele," was obviously inspired by the sixth book of Goethe's Wilhelm Meister: "Bekenntnisse einer Schonen Seele." 115 and a rigorous indoctrination into the Catholic faith. As she entered adolescence Maria was sent to live with an aunt in Dresden where she was provided with opulent surroundings and an expensive education. Maria was exceptionally well-educated for a female child and her assertion that, "[d]as Leben ist Lernen, und wenn man ausgelernt hat, wird das Leben Geniefien,"283 seemed to contradict the later conclusions of Ute Frevert that the women of the Biedermeier period expected to find fulfilment only in their duties as wives and mothers. Maria herself acknowledged that her love of learning and especially her awareness of history set her apart from many of the other women of her age. "Diese Uberzeugung, die ich gewann, eroffhete mir zugleich einen freieren Blick iiber die Weltgeschichte und deren Fortschritte, da mir bis dahin, wie jedem Madchen, alles historische Interesse ziemlich fremd geblieben war." 2 8 4 However, Maria's education had only been provided in order to make her a better mistress to the nobleman who had been funding her lessons; thus the traditional expectations of her time remained more or less intact. The discovery of her intended future provoked in Maria a spiritual crisis. Maria felt trapped between the Catholic upbringing of her early years, the liberating nature of the knowledge she had gained through her education, and her guilty enjoyment of the pleasures afforded by her present lifestyle. Over-riding all of these concerns was the knowledge of what her future held. In one of the more interesting observations in Maria's letter she revealed that she longed at times to be a man, because only then could she escape her fate: 2 8 3Mundt, Madonna, 200. 2UIbid, 204. 116 Ich dachte, wenn ich ein Mann ware, wollte ich fortlaufen, und mich lieber in eine Bodenkammer bei einer armen Weberfamilie einmiethen, als hier bleiben! Hier, wo ein zweideutiges Weib der raffinirten Unterhaltung eines Grafen Opfer erzieht. Und am andern Morgen war immer Alles wieder vergessen, was ich gedacht hatte.285 Here Mundt revealed Maria's awareness of the limitations of her era and her gender. At the mid-point of the letter Mundt's generally empathetic portrait of Maria's crisis gave way to a graphic depiction of the attempted seduction of Maria by the nobleman and the consummation of her relationship with her tutor, the details of which seemed completely at odds with the complex characterization Mundt had been building earlier. As Maria surrendered to the world of the flesh she forgot all of her earlier concerns and gave herself over completely to hedonistic pursuits. One could perhaps read this as a endorsement of sensualism (as in fact the censor did) except that by the end of the letter her doubts and concerns had returned and it became obvious that her exploration of worldly pleasures had only served to complicate her life further. This fact did not, however, prevent Mundt from applauding her sensualism for the remainder of the novel, even after Maria announced that she had finally found happiness by being baptized into the Protestant Church. Mundt thus provided a very inconsistent and contradictory picture of his heroine. He did not explain how Protestantism could provide a satisfactory home for such an educated and worldly soul, nor did he reconcile her earlier experiences with her belated conversion. Indeed, the introduction of Protestantism seemed to be a device to placate the censor rather than an integral part of the plot. Additional writings by Mundt, however, would seem to indicate that "'Ibid, 214. 117 his unsatisfactory ending was symptomatic of a more deep-rooted inability to come to terms with the implications of a life of sensualism. In September 1835, in his capacity as editor of Literarischer Zodiacus, Mundt reviewed Heinrich Laube's Liebesbriefe, an exploration of the Saint-Simonian idea of the emancipation of love. Here Mundt argued that a woman could never be truly committed to the emancipation of love for "[d]ies ist im hochsten Grade unpsychologisch und mortificirt alle Eigenthumlichkeit der weiblichen Natur. Denn das Weib, welches liebt, ist eifersiichtig, und kann, wie die Liebe iiberhaupt, nicht dulden, daB man andere Gotter habe neben ihr." 2 8 6 Thus, though Mundt himself had created a character in Maria who was committed to a life of sensualism, he was unwilling or unable to acknowledge that a woman could be satisfied by such a life, hence the belated conversion of Maria to Protestantism.287 Overall, Mundt's writings provided a confusing and oftentimes contradictory interpretation of female emancipation. He was clearly aware of the limitations which bourgeois society placed upon the women of his era, but the psychological impact of those limitations was barely explored. Mundt hardly mentioned Maria's motivations. She retreated into a world of sensualism only to be saved in the end by her discovery of the Protestant faith, yet the reader does not know why her new faith provided a satisfactory resolution of her psychological crisis. 2 8 6Theodor Mundt, "Liebesbriefe. Novelle von Heinrich Laube. Leipzig: Otto Wigand, 1835," Literarischer Zodiacus (September 1835), 219. 2 8 7Mundt's characterization of Maria appears to have been influenced by the Romantic writers' interest in exploring the implications of a life of irreligiosity and immorality. Like many of the early Romantics Mundt explored Maria's life from childhood to maturity in order to demonstrate the implications of a life of sensualism. In doing so, however, he produced an inconsistent and contradictory characterization. 118 In addition, by retelling the story of the Bohemian Handmaidens' War, Mundt apparently denied that women could achieve emancipation on their own. Men such as Theodor von Hippel and the Saint-Simonians would achieve their emancipation for them. Finally, despite his characterization of Maria, Mundt ultimately rejected the idea that a woman could ever be satisfied by a life of sensualism, considering this to be in the highest degree unferhinine. 2. Unlike Theodor Mundt, Karl Gutzkow developed a much clearer and more consistent position on female emancipation. Gutzkow's views were inspired in large part by his interaction with his female contemporaries. The life and death of Charlotte Stieglitz featured prominently in Gutzkow's work, as it did in the work of Mundt. In February 1835 Gutzkow devoted the feature article in Phonix to a tribute to Charlotte Stieglitz.2 8 8 Noting that few events since the death of Karl Sand 2 8 9 had moved Germany and its writers more than the originality of the death of Stieglitz, Gutzkow explored the implications of such a sacrifice and in doing so illuminated the complex relationship between male and female literary production. The core of Gutzkow's argument was his belief that Heinrich Stieglitz had been paralyzed both Karl Gutzkow, "Cypressen fur Karoline [sic] Stieglitz," Phonix: Fruhlingszeitung fur Deutschland, Literaturblatt Nr. 8 (25.02.1835), 189-191; Gutzkow's use of the name Karoline reflected the fact that he had never met Stieglitz personally, a fact to which he admitted in a December review of Charlotte Stieglitz. Ein Denkmal; Karl Gutzkow, "Charlotte Stieglitz. Ein Denkmal," Deutsche Revue, Nr. 1 (1.12.1835), 40. Heinrich Stieglitz (b.1801) left Berlin shortly after his wife's death, travelling first to Munich then Rome and finally Venice where he became a prominent political figure in 1848; Stieglitz died of cholera in 1849. 2 8 9 Kar l Ludwig Sand (1795-1820) was the young student who assassinated August von Kotzebue in Mannheim on March 23, 1819, leading to severe repression, especially against the freedom of the universities and the Burschenschaften. Sand's action also led to the imposition of the Karlsbad Decrees of 1819. 119 by the greater talent of his wife and the lack of any true inspiration. Heinrich's work was dull and uninspired, dismissed outright by Wolfgang Menzel for its lack of originality. Heinrich had been unable to give voice to his muse because he lacked the depth of insight that his wife possessed. Thus Charlotte elected to provide him, by her death, with a tragedy equalling the blindness of Milton or the poverty of Homer for its inspirational value. Gutzkow concluded by imploring Heinrich to use this sacrifice properly and not to waste his wife's gift. 2 9 0 In one of the last articles Gutzkow wrote before the Reichstag ban prohibited the distribution of the works of the Young Germans,291 he returned to the subject of Charlotte Stieglitz. In this article Gutzkow devoted some time to an examination of the quality of her work. Though Gutzkow observed that she was neither a thinker like Rahel, nor a poet like Bettina, he did note that she possessed a strong will, an unusual power of toleration, and an educated mind: Manches, was aus ihrem Munde kommt, ist artig gesagt: Stil und Urteil sind scharf ausgepragt. Man sieht hier eines jener schonen weiblichen Wesen, die uns zum Gluck noch oft begegnen: nicht originell, nicht begiinstigt von der Natur, etwas ernst, schwer und nachdenkend im Begreifen: nicht einmal besonders arrondiert in den weiten Gebieten des Wissenswerten; aber glau [sic] und munter sich dafur interessierend, zuweilen gespornt vom edelsten Ehrgeiz, sinnig zuhorend bei ernstem Gesprach und, aus tiefster Naivitat, zuweilen Gutzkow, "Cypressen fur Karoline [sic] Stieglitz", 191. 2 9 1The Reichstag ban eventually prevented the publication of the Deutsche Revue in which this article was to have appeared. Gutzkow tried twice to evade the ban, once by publishing the journal under the title Deutsche Blatter fur Leben, Kunst und Wissenschaft; on this occasion, however, Gutzkow's publisher Lowenthal, under increasing pressure from the censor, refused to distribute the work during the sensitive months after the federal ban. Later in 1836 the article was published in a somewhat edited form, along with "Cypressen fur Karoline [sic] Stieglitz," in Gutzkow's, Beitrdge zur Geschichte der neuesten Literatur, Bd. II (Stuttgart: P. Balz'sche Buchhandlung, 1836), 114-136. 120 dialektische Momente spendend, die der Debatte eine neue Wendung geben. Upon reviewing some of Gutzkow's comments on Charlotte Stieglitz, several of the arguments of the feminist school seem well-founded. In Gutzkow's eyes Stieglitz' power came not from her literary talents, but rather from her naivete and occasional flashes of noble ambition. Further, Gutzkow seemed to pay no attention to the depth of thought found in her diaries. Though he found Stieglitz' writing to be stylish, she remained simply a representative of the feminine way of writing and nothing more. However, it was clear from subsequent comments on Bettina von Arnim and Rahel Varnhagen von Ense that Gutzkow did not hold the same attitude towards all women writers. As an aside to his comments on Charlotte Stieglitz, Gutzkow also addressed Menzel's critique of Bettina von Arnim's Goethes Briefwechsel mit einem Kind. Menzel had attacked von Arnim's motives, noting that "Bettina liebte Goethe; das ist gut: sie gibt das Geheimnis ihres Herzens heraus, das ist unweiblich."2 9 3 Gutzkow began his rebuttal by noting that Goethes Briefwechsel mit einem Kind was one of the most notable literary phenomena of the age. Bettina's only crime had been her willingness to break with convention. Why should she not share her joy in Goethe with the German public? 2 9 4 Gutzkow thus acknowledged that a woman was capable of producing a remarkable piece of literature. Indeed he was so intrigued with Bettina's work that he and Wienbarg extended to her an invitation. In a letter dated September 2 9 2Gutzkow, "Charlotte Stieglitz. Ein Denkmal," 40-41. 2 9 3Wolfgang Menzel quoted in ibid., 42. 121 15, 1835, Gutzkow requested that Bettina join them in producing the Deutsche Revue, the journal then in the planning stages that was to represent the crowning achievement of the new literature.295 However, the intervention of the censor stifled the production of the Deutsche Revue before its first edition and thus eliminated the possibility of collaboration among Wienbarg, Gutzkow and von Arnim. Nonetheless, two years later Gutzkow recorded that he was once again in contact with Bettina and had been privileged to visit her. For two hours he had been entranced by the depth and breadth of her knowledge. "Wir sprachen iiber alles und hatten doch, als wir schieden, erst anfangen mogen! Diese Vielseitigkeit, diese Gedankenspriinge, diese geistreiche Formgebung im Momente, dieses neckische Spiel mit der Wahrheit oder mit dem Schein derselben — es bezauberte."296 Many years later Gutzkow's devotion to Bettina's work was still evident. In a review of Bettina's Konigsbuch which appeared in the Telegraph fur Deutschland in 1843 Gutzkow defended the author from accusations of communism: One [critic] has reflected upon this section of the book, and called it communistic, one hears what is spoken and remarks upon this amazing new word—communism! Is the highest most beautiful love among mankind communism? then it bears mentioning that communism will find many new adherents.297 Gutzkow and Wienbarg to Bettina von Arnim (Frankfurt am Main: 15.9.1835), BdfG, 228; the only other writers to receive such an invitation were Ludwig Borne and Heinrich Heine: Gutzkow and Wienbarg to Borne (Frankfurt am Main: 14.9.1835), BdfG, Anm. II (88); Gutzkow and Wienbarg to Heine (Frankfurt am Main: 15.9.1835), BdfG, 62. 2 9 6The report of this visit was not published until 1840; Karl Gutzkow, "Ein Besuch bei Bettinen," Telegraph fur Deutschland, Nr. 12 (January 1840); GWIII, 115. 2 9 7Review of Bettina von Arnim's, Dies Buch gehort dem Konig, in Telegraph fur Deutschland, Nr. 165 (October 1843), 697. Quoted in English in Edith Waldstein, Bettine von Arnim and the Politics of Romantic Conversation (Columbia, SC: Camden House, 1988), 79. 122 Despite this continuing and remarkable support from Gutzkow, recently published analyses of von Arnim's work still argue that breaking with tradition and attempting to enter the male-dominated world of the German literary establishment was "enough to deny Bettina von Arnim entry into the literary canon of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries."298 Bettina von Arnim's exclusion was not a product of a systematic exclusion of women; rather, her work appears to have suffered the same fate as much of the new literature, produced by both male and female writers: it was consigned to obscurity as an interesting experiment, but lacking the substance of the Nachmdrz writers.2 9 9 The controversy surrounding Goethes Briefwechsel mit einem Kind and the death of Charlotte Stieglitz offers an excellent opportunity to see the divergent views of Gutzkow and Mundt with respect to literary production by women. While Mundt saw Stieglitz as representative of everything that was new and exciting about his age, Karl Gutzkow viewed her simply as a noble representative of feminine literary production. She was neither a great thinker nor a poet of the quality of Bettina von Arnim. On the other hand, Gutzkow believed that Bettina had produced one of the most remarkable books of the day. Whereas Mundt saw Bettina as a representative of the older Romantic school, Gutzkow perceived a depth and breadth of knowledge and a talent which made her worthy of inclusion among the best of the new literature. 2 9 8 Edith Waldstein, "Goethe and Beyond: Bettine von Arnim's Correspondence with a Child and Giinderode," in Waldstein and Goodman, In the Shadow of Olympus, 113. 2 9 9This is the argument advanced by Peter Hohendahl concerning the fate of the Young German literature. Hohendahl, Building a National Literature, 108-111. 123 Another woman who figured prominently in Gutzkow's work was Rahel Varnhagen von Ense. Her writings, like those of Bettina, came under attack from Wolfgang Menzel in 1835. Though Gutzkow was inclined to dismiss MenzePs criticisms outright since Rahel "hat zu viel Freunde in Deutschland gewonnen, als dafi ich ihre Rechtfertigung zu ubernehmen brauchte,"300 he nonetheless spent some time in several issues of the Literaturblatt reflecting upon Rahel's contributions. Gutzkow observed that Menzel's criticism of Rahel was motivated by the fact that his three-year absence from Germany had left him out of touch with the changes which had taken place. He was thus criticizing what was new, namely the work of Charlotte Stieglitz, Bettina von Arnim and Rahel Varnhagen von Ense, without really understanding its value. Gutzkow gave more detailed consideration to the importance of Rahel Varnhagen von Ense in an article entitled "Rahel, Bettina, Charlotte Stieglitz."3 0 1 This article confronted the impact of Rahel's letters.302 Gutzkow noted that her letters had been dismissed with disdain by many of her male contemporaries during her lifetime and she had been forced to live as a solitary thinker. However, a closer look at her work revealed that Rahel's letters could provide 3 0 0Gutzkow, "Charlotte Stieglitz. Ein Denkmal," 42. 3 0 1Gutzkow had contracted with Hoffmann & Campe to publish this and several other essays in the second volume of Offentliche Charaktere, but the Prussian ban prevented the publication of the work. Though several of the planned articles were subsequently edited and published in Beitrdge zur Geschichte der neuesten Literatur (1836), this article was not. The version cited here can be found in Gutzkow's collected works; Karl Gutzkow, "Rahel, Bettina, Charlotte Stieglitz," GWIII, 98-112. 3 0 2Rahel's letters were collected, edited, and published posthumously by her husband under the title Rahel: ein Buch des Andenkens fiir ihre Freunde (Berlin: Duncker and Humbolt, 1834). 124 a tremendous source of change. Most importantly, Rahel challenged the traditional assumptions regarding morality, the social order and religion: Die Neuerungslust... las aus den Briefen der Rahel eine zartkeimende Saat neuer titanischer Ahnungen heraus Noch nie hat es politische Umwalzungen gegeben ohne Angriffe auf die gleichzeitigen moralischen, gesellschaftlichen und religiosen Begriffe.... Jeder groBe Prophet kam in die Verlegenheit, von einem schwarmerischen Anhanger politisch gedeutet zu werden.3 0 3 The degree to which Gutzkow viewed his female contemporaries as literary equals was further evident in the July 25 edition of the Literaturblatt, in which he reviewed George Sand's Lelia: Ein Roman nach dem Franzdsischen. Though ordinarily a harsh critic during his time as editor of the Literaturblatt, Gutzkow was evidently entranced by Sand's work. He commented that, despite too many allegorical elements, the novel contained a power of truth that was staggering; the gender of the author was irrelevant and the novel demonstrated that it might be possible for a woman to enter into the inner circle of the new literature. "Ist es moglich, daB eine Frau sich so in den innersten Kreis der Bewegungsideen versetzen kann! Uber Moral, Staat, Religion, Sitte und Herkommen tragen ihre Urtheile alle die halb lachelnde, halb wehmutige Physiogmonie der neuen Zeit." 3 0 4 Gutzkow concluded by noting that as soon as a new work by Sand appeared he would immediately give notice in the Literaturblatt. Evidently Gutzkow's interest in George Sand did not wane in later years. In the preface to the second edition of Wally he acknowledged the depth of his debt to Sand. According to 3 0 3Gutzkow, "Rahel, Bettina, Charlotte Stieglitz," GWIII, 99-100. 3 0 4 Kar l Gutzkow, "Lelia. Ein Roman nach dem Franzosischen des Georges Sand," Phonix: Fruhlingszeitung fur Deutschland, Literaturblatt Nr. 29 (25.07.1835), 695. 125 Gutzkow, the character of Wally represented "the French witch Lelia, in German garb." Indeed there was more than a passing similarity between the two strong female characters, especially in their frequent doubts about the value of religion in a changing society.306 Finally, in his autobiographical Ruckblicke auf mein Leben, Gutzkow returned again to the subject of Georges Sand, reaffirming once more her pioneering role in the new European literature.307 The seriousness with which Gutzkow treated female writers was also reflected in the fictional characterizations of women in his novels. Gutzkow's female characters were depicted as complex individuals who were capable of a remarkable degree of esoteric thought. The most infamous of Gutzkow's female characterizations was Wally, the skeptic.308 Gutzkow divided Wally, die Zweiflerin into three sections. In the first and second parts, Gutzkow's voice is omnipresent as the narrator who described Wally's life and actions. The third and final part utilized a very different format. The third part of the novel consisted of Wally's diary, through Cited in Ruth-Ellen Boetcher-Joeres, text notes to Karl Gutzkow, Wally, the Skeptic, transl. Ruth-Ellen Boetcher-Joeres (Trankfurt am Main: Herbert Lang, 1974), 114n. 3 0 6Other biographers of Gutzkow insist that Wally was more likely an amalgam of several women whom Gutzkow knew, most importantly Charlotte Stieglitz whose death was mirrored in Wally's own suicide, and Rahel Varnhagen. See Peter Miiller, "Introduction," Gutzkows Gesammelte Werke, Bd. 2 (Leipzig: Bibliographisches Institut, 1911), 188-189. 3 0 7 Kar l Gutzkow, Ruckblicke auf mein Leben (Berlin: Hoffmann u. Campe, 1875), GWIV, 22. 3 0 8The title of Gutzkow's novel has been translated as Wally the Skeptic or Wally the Flirt. There is, however, one textual reference which clarifies the translation. Shortly before her suicide Wally made the following comment, "Noch sechs Monate hielt Wally ein Leben aus, dessen Stiitze weggenommen war. Sie, die Zweiflerin, die Ungewisse, die Feindin Gottes, war sie nicht frommer als die, welche sich mit einem nichtverstandenen Glauben beruhigen;" Karl Gutzkow, Wally, die Zweiflerin (Mannheim: C. Lowenthal, 1835), GWII, 305. This is the only use of the title word "Zweiflerin" in the novel and in this context, 'skeptic' would seem to make far more sense than 'flirt.' 126 which she spoke directly to the audience, and a long treatise entitled "Confessions on Religion and Christianity," which Wally was reading while writing her diary. In this final part Gutzkow's voice was almost entirely absent and the image of Wally which emerges is markedly different than that which had appeared in the earlier chapters.309 The picture of Wally in the first two parts of the novel is one of a selfish elitist, a woman who thrived upon childish games and was easily bored by intellectual conversations. "Wally tanzte bis in die Nacht. O welch ein Gliick, sich mit dem faden Mittelgut in ewiggleichen Kreisen herumzudrehen!"310 Very early in the narrative the reader is presented with a concise summary of Wally's character. Gutzkow depicted his heroine as shallow, frivolous, and incapable of serious intellectual thought. Er gab sich willig dem Spotte Wallys hin, die viel zu leichtsinnig war, auf dergleichen Debatten etwas zu geben, zu eitel, um eine allgemeine Unterhaltung interessant zu finden, und die uberdies weder sang noch spielte. Wally hatte Ideen, aber nur momentan; sie verschmahte es, die Geistreiche zu scheinen, weil sie wuBte, daG sie schon war. Fliichtig waren ihre Bewegungen, liebenswurdig, ohne Pedanterei ihre Kapricen. Casar fuhlte das und badete sich in dem oberflachlichen Schaume, den Wally von den Ideen nur gelten lieB. Casar hatte recht, sie fur unfahig zur Spekulation zu halten. Er nahm sie wie ein The first two parts of the novel are divided into short chapters, usually two to three pages in length; the final part is divided into shorter journal entries, with the treatise on religion appended. The final pages of the novel are occupied by an apparently unconnected essay "Wahrheit und Wirklichkeit," which appears to be Gutzkow's reflections upon his own novel. There is considerable disagreement about the purpose of this section. Several scholars, including Johannes ProelB, Das junge Deutschland. Ein Buch deutscher Geistesgeschichte (Stuttgart: Cotta, 1892), 573, have argued that the essay was included in order to extend the novel beyond the twenty folio sheet length that was subject to the approval of the Vorzensur; in 1874, however, Gutzkow added the subtitle "As an Explanation" to this section indicating that he had always intended the essay to clarify his intentions in the novel. The essay itself was originally published in Phonix as "Wahrheit und Wirklichkeit," Phonix: Fruhlingszeitung fur Deutschland, Literaturblatt Nr. 29 (25.07.1835), 693-695. 3 1 0Gutzkow, Wally, die Zweiflerin, GWII, 196. 127 humoristiscb.es Capriccio der animalistischen Natur. Throughout the early chapters of the novel Wally's actions seem to confirm this dismissive portrayal of her character and intellectual capacity. More importantly this characterization seems to provide additional evidence in support of the image of the Vormdrz woman which has been sketched by Frevert. Wally was depicted as a beautiful ornament incapable of much beyond a decorative function. Subsequent chapters show that Wally was consumed by the quest for a suitable husband but in the meantime was quite content to occupy herself with the men of the banal social circle in which she moved. There were indications, however, subtly underlined by Gutzkow's narrative, that Wally did not fit the typical image of a Biedermeier woman. Early in the narrative the audience was told that Wally enjoyed reading much of the new literature, from Heine's Salon, which she regarded as childishly simple and evidence of French philosophical backwardness, to "[ejinige Schriften vom Jungen Deutschland... von Wienbarg, Laube, Mundt." 3 1 2 Later, the narrative revealed that Wally was deeply preoccupied both with religious doubt and with misgivings regarding the expectations placed upon women by the society in which they lived. In a letter to a confidant, Wally wrote of her concerns regarding the position of women in German society. 3nIbid., 205-206. 3 1 2It is interesting to note that Gutzkow did not include himself among the Young Germans and took this opportunity, via Wally's comments on Wienbarg, Mundt and Laube, to make judgements about them. Thus, Wienbarg was too democratic, Laube would rather outdo the nobility than do away with it, and Mundt was unintelligible to anyone other than himself. As to Heine, Wally commented "hier sind all die gelehrten, bemoOsten Karpfen der deutschen Philosophie mit Fruhlingspetersilie und Vanille zubereitet. Man sollte die Bonbons in Aphorismen aus Heines ,Salon' einschlagen"; ibid, 197. 128 This was one of the rare opportunities provided in the first book to hear Wally's thoughts without Gutzkow's narration: Zuweilen erschreck' ich vor dieser pflanzenartigen BewuBtlosigkeit, in welcher die Frauen vegetieren, vor dieser Zufalligkeit in alien ihren Begriffen, in ihrem Meinen und Furwahrhalten. Der Augenblick ist der Urheber unsrer Handlungen und die VergeBlichkeit die Richterin derselben.... Nimm diese Klagen nicht als die Frucht eines regnerischen Tages; o — ich leide an einem Schmerze, der unheilbar ist, da ich inn gar nicht zu nennen weiB.... Was ist der Kern dieser spiralformig fortkreiselnden Unruhe? Die Manner sind glucklich, weil man an sie Anforderungen macht. Das Mafi ihrer Handlungen ist der Beifall oder der Nutzen, den sie damit gewinnen. Auch dies sage, warum wir den ,Faust' nicht lesen sollen?313 Wally continued that the problem for contemporary women was that no one demanded anything of them or wanted anything from them. Their upbringing had left them in a cage which they were not permitted to leave. Women were expected to move about gracefully with charm and delicacy within the prison that had been created for them. "Diese Gefangenschaft unserer Meinungen — ach, war Spreu fur den Wind! Rechte will ich in Anspruch nehmen, fur wen? fur was?" 3 1 4 This was perhaps the clearest statement from Gutzkow, via the character of Wally, regarding the stultifying effect of the Biedermeier woman's existence. In his portrayal of Wally, Gutzkow allowed his audience to witness the expectations which were placed upon the women of the Vormdrz era, as well as illuminating the negative psychological repercussions of these expectations. Moreover, by creating a woman who was capable of such deep contemplation of her condition, Gutzkow was challenging traditional assumptions which saw Ibid, 227, emphasis added; this section, concerning the male vocation closely mirrored Rahel Varnhagen von Ense's comments to her sister regarding the criteria by which men and women were judged. 3uIbid, 228. 129 women as incapable of esoteric or philosophical thought. Clearly, Wally's thoughts ranged far beyond the traditional realm of Kinder, Kirche und Kuche. In book two, however, Wally returned to her frivolous existence, having finally found a suitably wealthy husband. Yet she was only able to postpone her doubts, not conquer them. In book three, Wally's diary, the reader was once again invited to contemplate her tortured existence. Wally found herself trapped in a loveless marriage, Gutzkow's description of which appears to confirm Ute Frevert's description of a typical bourgeois marriage: a marriage which represented "not a lovematch, but an operation planned with military precision and with clearly defined goals and tasks."315 Finding no fulfilment in her duties as a wife, Wally attempted to bury herself in her social obligations. Ultimately, however, this too failed and her diary entries revealed that she grew more preoccupied than ever with religious doubts. Wally's battle with religious doubt was an ongoing struggle which had appeared periodically in books one and two. In the diary, however, Wally's doubts emerged full blown, triggered by her reading of the Wolfenbuttel Fragments.316 Lessing's edited collection of the Frevert, Women in German History, 40-41. 3 1 6The so-called Wolfenbuttel Fragments (named after the town where Lessing served as a librarian) were written by Hermann Samuel Reimarus (1694-1768) over the last few years of his life. Reimarus had written that Christianity's ethical and practical focus had been distorted by the Apostles and by Jesus' own preoccupation with the Jewish vision of the Messiah. According to Ruth-Ellen Boetcher-Joeres, Lessing's interest in the Fragments began in 1768 when he met Reimarus in Hamburg. Lessing's edited collection of the Fragments appeared between 1774 and 1787, though he attributed them to Johan Lorenz Schmidt to protect Reimarus' surviving family. Karl Gutzkow, Wally, the Skeptic, trans. Ruth-Ellen Boetcher-Joeres (Bern: Herbert Lang, 1974), 125n. Gutzkow evidently had ulterior motives in discussing the so-called Wolfenbuttel Fragments. In his autobiography he indicated a desire to make the Fragments understandable to the general public by publishing a new edition of them in 1835. When he could not find a publisher willing to handle the controversial fragments he 130 Fragments seized Wally's imagination though she lamented the impact of censorship on the availability of the document: Der Verfasser soil ein ehemaliger Hamburger Arzt, Reimarus, gewesen sein. Die vollstandige Prufung des Christentums steht in einem Glasschranke auf der Hamburger Bibliothek. Sie wollen das Buch nicht herausgeben. Sie furchten, daB aus dem vergilbten Papiere jener Kritik Motten fliegen, die das Christentum selbst anffessen.... Die Fragmente nehmen meine ganze Aufmerksamkeit in Anspruch. Ihr niichterner, leidenschaftsloser Ton erschreckt das Gewissen nicht. Ich lese in der besten Laune.... Ganz mannlich werden meine Ausdriicke! 3 1 7 Despite the positive impact of the Fragments on her mood, Wally was unable to find the answers to her questions on religion either in the Fragments or in another treatise entitled "Gestandnisse iiber Religion und Christenthum."318 In fact, Wally became even more skeptical as a result of reading these documents. Wally's diary also contained insights into other key issues of the era. Her diary was quite critical of Bettina von Arnim and Rahel Varnhagen von Ense, even though Gutzkow had praised their work. While Gutzkow had commended the revolutionary impact of Rahel's work, Wally dismissed her as incapable of producing anything substantive. Bettina meanwhile was admired for her willingness to behave according to her impulses, but "[e]in ffeies Weib ist nur decided to raise people's awareness of them through Wally; Gutzkow, Ruckblicke auf mein Leben, GWIV, 174-175. This is another example of fiction serving as camouflage for ideas that could not be discussed in any other medium. 3 1 7Gutzkow, Wally, die Zweiflerin, GWII, 277-278. 3 1 8Unlike the Wolfenbuttel Fragments "Gestandnisse iiber Religion und Christenthum" was not an actual treatise, rather it was created by Gutzkow in order to illustrate the religious beliefs of his characters. At the 1835 hearings which led to the eventual banning of Wally, Gutzkow was accused of expressing his personal beliefs through this essay. This he denied, claiming that the opinions expressed were merely a compilation of thoughts previously expressed in the novel. 131 ertraglich mit Spekulation."319 Again, Gutzkow allowed Wally to represent the contradictions of her age, desperately seeking truth and meaning herself, she nonetheless attacked Rahel for her demonically sinister way of continually looking for the truth. "Will sie es nur anders machen als die andern? Oder wurde ihr diese Originalitat angeboren? Sie gibt nirgends nach, sie ist rastlos in ihren Bestrebungen, die verschiedenen Seiten der Wahrheit zu entdecken und konnte nicht anders enden, als entweder in einem Wahnsinn, der sich mit der Bewegung im Tretrade vergleichen laBt, oder als Anhangerin des Pietismus."320 Eventually Wally followed precisely the path she had charted for Rahel; unable to find answers to her growing list of questions, she ended her doubts by committing suicide, an act which could either be regarded as a sign of feminine weakness or a courageous, even fitting, end for a women who could no longer live under the repressive expectations of her era. 3 2 1 Gutzkow's novel also introduced another female character to the reader: Delphine. Whereas Wally can be seen as an amalgam of several different women, fictional and factual, the character of Delphine was based on a friend of Gutzkow and his publisher Carl Lowenthal from 3 1 9Gutzkow, Wally, die Zweiflerin, GWII, 283. 320Ibid, 283-284. 3 2 1 Suicide featured prominently in the Young German novels; Gutzkow seemed to adhere to Rahel Varnhagen's interpretation that the living should not pass judgement upon those who choose suicide as an option for "this concerns those who have nothing to be happy about; let each search his own heart as to whether such people are many or few in number;" Rahel Varnhagen von Ense, Rahel. Ein Buch des Andenkens fur ihre Freunde, vol. 1 (Berlin: Duncker & Humbolt, 1834), 576-577 quoted in English in Ruth-Ellen Boetcher-Joeres' text notes to her translation of Wally. Karl Gutzkow, Wally, the Skeptic, trans. Ruth-Ellen Boetcher-Joeres, 126n. This was the section of Rahel's book which Wally was struggling to comprehend when she ended her own life. 132 Mannheim—Delphine Ladenburg. In his autobiography Gutzkow noted that Lowenthal had encouraged him to create a female character who embodied all of Frau Ladenburg's attributes. "Lebensfroh, poetisch gestimmt, wie wir beide [Gutzkow and Lowenthal] waren, hatte ich auf seinen Wunsch [Lowenthal] sogar einen weiblichen Charakter hereingezogen, der vollstandig, die Dame verherrlichend, nach dem Leben gezeichnet war." 3 2 3 Unlike the character of Wally whom Gutzkow allowed to speak directly to the audience, Delphine appeared only in the pages of Wally's diary. Nonetheless, Wally sketched a remarkably complete picture of Delphine, who, she observed, "ist so verschieden von mir." 3 2 4 The first diary entry on Delphine described a women who was not exceptionally good-looking, nor overly intelligent; rather her charm was ascribed to her self-surrendering helplessness and her Judaism.325 Rather than commend her helplessness, however, Wally argued that Delphine needed to read more in order to improve The use of an actual person created considerable trouble following the publication of Wally. Gutzkow's unwillingness to change the name and mask the reference to Frau Ladenburg in the second edition of Wally provoked a heated exchange between Gutzkow and Lowenthal in 1851. At Lowenthal's insistence Gutzkow reluctantly changed the name to the hardly deceptive 'Adolphine' in the 1851 and 1874 editions of the novel; Lowenthal to Gutzkow quoted in Heinrich Houben, Gutzkow-Funde: Beitrdge zur Literatur und Kulturgeschichte des neunzehnten Jahrhunderts (Berlin: Wolff, 1901), 188. 3 2 3Gutzkow, Ruckbliche auf mein Leben, GWIV, 176; Paul Mviller maintains that Delphine also bears more than a passing resemblance to Rahel and to another female companion of Gutzkow's, Charlotte Birch-Pfeiffer, who was eleven years his senior and the object of his affections for many years; Muller, "Introduction," Wally, die Zweiflerin, GWII, 188-189. The fact that Lowenthal suggested the inclusion of a character based on Frau Ladenburg would seem to contradict the defence he offered at the Mannheim trial. There Lowenthal was acquitted on the grounds that he was unaware of the novel's content prior to its publication. 3 2 4Gutzkow, Wally, die Zweiflerin, GWII, 270. 3 2 5The issue of Delphine's Judaism is dealt with in Chapter Four. 133 her mind and allow her to sustain a logical discussion for more than a few minutes. "[S]ie sollte sich durch vielfache Lekture darin zu bilden suchen, was iiber die Musik und das bloBe Gefuhl hinausliegt... Casar muB ihr Biicher geben."326 Despite the fact that it was Casar's books which were ultimately responsible for all of Wally's doubts, she clearly believed that it was better to be exposed to such ideas than to remain ignorant. Hence the reader was given another indication that Wally believed the role of women needs to be modified. Gutzkow created an immensely complex image of women in Wally, die Zweiflerin. Wally and Delphine reflected all of the elements of Biedermeier femininity which have been delineated by Ute Frevert. Both were constrained by traditional assumptions regarding the woman's role as ornament; both saw marriage as their highest calling; and Wally was suspicious of Rahel and Bettina, accusing both of engaging in unfeminine behaviour. Yet both were fascinated by the prospect of pushing the acceptable boundaries of female behaviour. Indeed the most difficult decision Wally was forced to make concerned her moral inability to consummate her relationship with Casar. Moreover, Gutzkow's Wally was extremely well-read, capable of deep philosophical contemplation, and clearly aware that she had been unnaturally repressed by the limits which her society had imposed upon the feminine sphere. This would seem to indicate a level of social awareness on Gutzkow's part, for which few contemporary writers have given him credit. The overall impression which one receives from Gutzkow's work is one of an era 3 2 6Gutzkow, Wally, die Zweiflerin, GWII, 271. 134 which contained many contradictory impulses, and as such exerted a considerable psychological toll on its citizens. Whether or not Gutzkow's characterization of Wally provides support for female emancipation is more difficult to judge. The fact that Wally was unable to live with her new-found skepticism and philosophical awareness would seem to support the need for a fundamental revision of women's roles in society. The vehicle by which that revision would be realized was, however, unclear. Certainly Wally was unable to effect such a change by herself and the society in which she lived showed no signs of facilitating this change. However, Gutzkow believed deeply that literature itself would be the medium which would transform society. Through the creation of characters which challenged traditional assumptions, society would be forced to confront alternate realities and slowly an entirely new order would evolve. Thus, just as the transformation of Wally's character resulted from her encounter with the Wolfenbiittel Fragments, Biedermeier society's transformation would be affected by contact with works such as Gutzkow's Wally. In this vision of emancipation both male and female writers would participate, since Gutzkow counted Bettina von Arnim and George Sand among the greatest talents of the new literature. 3. Whereas both Gutzkow and Mundt were relatively sympathetic towards female writers, Heinrich Laube was evidently less charitable towards some of the works by his female contemporaries. In 1833 Laube reviewed Charlotte von Gliimer's Wahrheit und Dichtung. Eine Sammlung historischer Novellen aus alter und neuer Zeit which featured a collection of works by women. Laube began by expressing the opinion that the average woman was only capable of writing family history due to her natural inability to address tragedy without trying 135 to heal it. Such statements certainly seem to confirm the assertions of the literary historians Goodman and Waldstein that women were considered incapable of serious literature. He went on, however, to note that a truly exceptional woman could potentially produce a masterpiece of literature, "so kdnnten wir manches Neue lernen und manche neue Freude erfahren."327 The main problem, however, was that when women took up literary careers they often wrote like men, becoming in the process "literarischefn] Hermaphroditen."328 Instead of women attempting to write like men and men, in turn, attempting to write like women, Laube observed that a truly worthy literature must attempt to combine both masculine and feminine writing. "[D]ann konnte man versuchen, das Gespinnst in einander zu schlagen, und die schdnste menschheitliche Cultur wurde sich ergeben."329 This line of argument puts Laube clearly into the romantic school of criticism, whose adherents regarded neither male nor female writing as adequate and instead sought an entirely new type of literature which blurred the boundaries of the masculine and the feminine sphere. Claims such as this might also indicate that Laube was initially drawn to the Saint-Simonian belief in an ideal social type that was man and woman together; there is, however, insufficient evidence at this point to suggest that Laube's views on women were coloured by Saint-Simonian doctrines. Insofar as the present work was concerned, Laube concluded that it was neither good nor bad, as was the case with most of the literature of the time, it simply existed. On the basis 3 2 7Heinrich Laube, "Wahrheit und Dichtung. Eine Sammlung historischer Novellen aus alter und neuer Zeit," Zeitung fur die elegante Welt, Nr. 148 (1.08.1835), 591. ™Ibid. ™Ibid. 136 of this review, however, it is not possible to support the hypothesis that Laube treated female writers more harshly than their male counterparts. He was equally critical of the works produced by the majority of male writers of the time. Laube claimed that the vast majority of this work could be reviewed with a three-word literary history: "man schrieb dies, das und jenes, es schrieben viele Tausende, aber sie schrieben bios dies, das und jenes."330 Despite his somewhat negative depiction of the new literature by women, Heinrich Laube's fictional works feature an overwhelming number of female characters. The two-part novel Die Poeten, the first section of Laube's three volume opus Das junge Europa, is particularly illustrative of the nature of his characterizations of women. 3 3 1 Das junge Europa is a complex novel written entirely in the form of letters between the major characters. The use of this format allowed Laube to establish a clear dialogue between supporters of the old social order and proponents of a revolutionary new order. The novel itself follows the lives of a small society of poets assembled at the fictional castle GrunschloC during the period of the July Revolution of 1830 and the Polish uprising. It features six major female characters: Clara, Camilla, Alberta, Constantie, Desdemona and Julia. In addition, a number of other women play minor roles in the narrative. The six primary characters are, however, the most informative with respect to Laube's views on women and their possible emancipation. Taken together, these six women represented an interesting cross-section of Biedermeier society. The lives of the six women were inordinately complex. Hence a brief overview of each Heinrich Laube, Die Poeten, 2 Bde. (Leipzig: Wigand, 1833). 137 woman is helpful in clarifying their roles in the narrative. Clara, though promised by her father to an unidentified stranger, was the first lover of the novel's hero—Valerius. Camilla was described as an enthusiastic and curious women who was attracted to Valerius at the beginning of the story and who would eventually become his partner in a free union based only on love at the end of the novel. Alberta was Camilla's best friend. Though engaged to another of the novel's characters she was also the lover of Hippolyt, the amoral anti-hero of the work. Constantie was of noble birth, a former mistress of Hippolyt and bent on vengeance due to the latter's betrayal. Desdemona was another of Hippolyt's conquests, an actress who had been driven from her home by the jealous Constantie. Finally, Julia was the only woman depicted as strong enough to resist Hippolyt's advances. She was responsible for Hippolyt's fateful flight to Paris and his involvement in the revolutionary events taking place there. According to E . M . Butler Laube's intent in Die Poeten was to "stage-manage a Saint-Simonian society on the lines laid down by Enfantin in the Enseignements"332 Thus the final agreement between Camilla and Valerius to undertake a free union based upon love alone, without the official restrictions of marriage, appeared to Butler as the completion of Prosper Enfantin's ideal society in which man and woman would unite out of love, free choice and personal preference. There can be little doubt that Laube was attracted by certain elements of 3 3 2Butler, Ihe Saint-Simonian Religion, 218. The Enseignements represented Prosper Enfantin's own additions to the original doctrine of Henri de Saint-Simon. Le Nouveau Christianisme (1825) the seminal work on Saint-Simonianism said only that religion was a morality based on love. Enfantin extended this idea further in 1828, concluding that man and woman together made up the basic social unit, but that union must be based upon free choice, personal preference and love. Moreover, that union must meet the physical needs of the woman. Robert B. Carlisle, The Proffered Crown: Saint-Simonianism and the Doctrine of Hope (Baltimore, M D : John's Hopkins: 1987), 154. 138 the Saint-Simonian doctrine early in his career, especially the idea of free love and the belief that man and woman together made up the ideal social type. His book reviews offer ample evidence of Laube's commitment to the importance of combining feminine and masculine attributes in a single form. 3 3 3 Similarly, Laube noted in October 1833, immediately after the publication of Die Poeten, that the doctrines of Henri de Saint-Simon represented the most important speculation of his time. 3 3 4 It is apparent that elements of a Saint-Simonian world-view can be found in Die Poeten. A closer examination of those elements, however, reveals the incomplete nature of Laube's understanding of the Saint-Simonian ideal of femininity. In the final analysis, Laube's characterizations represent a fundamentally traditional view of the role of women, not a revolutionary one. Free love was a constant theme throughout Die Poeten, as evidenced by the many lovers taken by each of the novel's primary male characters: Valerius, Hippolyt and Constantin. Al l three men seem to be entirely preoccupied by the emotional and physical attributes of love. This preoccupation was aptly summarized by Valerius who observed: "Ich bin der Liebe treu, nicht aber der Geliebten. Weil ich eben die Liebe liebte, so liebte ich die schone Alberta, die muntre, geistreiche Camilla." 3 3 5 Among the female characters, however, there appeared to be less enthusiasm for such ideas. The character of Camilla, however, seems at first glance to 3 3 3Laube, "Wahrheit und Dichtung," 591-592. 3 3 4Heinrich Laube, "Der MeBkatalog," Zeitung fur die elegante Welt, Nr. 198 (10.10.1833), 792. See Chapter Four for a more complete discussion of Laube's fluctuating interest in the Saint-Simonians. 3 3 5Laube, Die Poeten, I, 69. 139 represent the Saint-Simonian ideal of a woman drawn into an intimate relationship by love, free choice and personal preference: Du sollst mich nicht heirathen, wenn Du nicht willst, das Heirathen ist auch wirklich nicht hubsch, es ist wirklich philisterhaft. Ich will bei Dir bleiben, so lange Du mich magst, und magst Du mich nicht mehr — nun — nun so will ich die Vergangenheit noch einmal allein leben und doch gliicklich sterben.336 Thus Camilla evidently acknowledged that marriage was unnecessary and further accepted that her relationship with Valerius might be temporary. Later in the same conversation she added that it gave her considerable pleasure to be part of the great social revolution and especially to be involved in its inception. Further, she was overjoyed when people acknowledged and envied her free and unfettered love-life with Valerius. 3 3 7 On this and several other occasions, however, Camilla expressed reservations about her new arrangement with Valerius, reservations which seem to undermine the ideal of a perfect Saint-Simonian union. "Meine guten Eltern sind todt, ihnen mach' ich keine Sorge durch dies neue ungewdhnliche, darum verdammte Leben...." 3 3 8 Camilla's description of her relationship as 'ungewohnliche' and 'verdammte' hardly seems to indicate a deep commitment to her new-found relationship. Rather, Camilla appears as a woman desperate not to lose the man she loved and therefore willing to acquiesce to an abnormal and damned relationship. Similarly her pledge to Valerius was not truly representative of the Saint-Simonian ideal. Valerius was free to leave the relationship if the time came when he could no longer tolerate Camilla; there was, 336Ibid, II, 159. 337 Ibid. 33*Ibid. 140 however, no reciprocal promise made by Valerius that would allow Camilla to leave the relationship i f she discovered that her physical needs were not being satisfied, an important element of Enfantin' & Enseignements. Other inconsistencies in the characterization of Camilla can also be found. Laube appeared to have been establishing Camilla as 'la mere supreme,' the one true woman, for whom the Saint-Simonians searched. However, even Butler acknowledged that this characterization did not work. 3 3 9 If Camilla was the one true woman then, according to Enfantin, Valerius should have abandoned all other women and devoted himself to her. However, the novel ended with Valerius unable to choose between Camilla and Clara, his first love. Thus when Valerius left Grunschlofi to join the revolutionary forces fighting in Poland, Clara still believed that Valerius would remain true to her as he had promised. One is thus left to conclude that Laube's attempt to imbue his characters with Saint-Simonian ideals was at best imperfect. While free love certainly featured prominently in the novel, Laube offered only a superficial interpretation of that ideal. Closer consideration of Laube's female characters reveals a degree of shallowness in all of his characters. The female characters, Camilla included, shared several common traits. A l l were unusually beautiful. Alberta was: "schdn wie Diana, sprdde wie Diana, gdttlich wie Diana.... Albertas Auge ist das Mahrchen [sic] von tausend und einer Nacht und die langen dunkeln Wimpern beschatten es wie die traumersche Palme Arabiens zur Zeit der Dammerung, fein und schlank, fast unmerklich gebogen ist die Nase, aber die zarten Flugel zittern mitunter wie Lotosblatter, die Brahma's Odem durchbebt, und dann hebt sich so herausfordernd der kleine Mund mit seinen vollen Lippen, 3 3 9Butler, The Saint-Simonian Religion, 214-215. 141 und um seine spielenden Winkel hupfen kleine iippige Tanzerinnen. The description of Clara was equally flattering: Clara lag halb entkleidet auf dem Sopha, ihr dunkelbraunes Haar war zur Halfte aufgelost und schmiegte sich schmeichelnd wie ein sehnsiichtiger Trieb, dem man Gewahrung gestattet, um Hals und Busen, ihre weiBe Hand und der schone, zur Halfte entbloBte Arm spielten damit.341 Constantie "bleibt das schonste Weib was ich [Hippolyt] gesehen. Linie, Muskil, Form, Auge, Wort, Geist, Gefuhl — Alles ist straff an ihr; sie ist der Gedanke eines Marines, der weibliche Form gefunden."342 Camilla had: ...ein auBerst liebreiches Gesicht, lachelnde schalkhafte Augen, eine zierliche Stumpfhase, einen kleinen iippigen Mund, der viel schwatzt und lacht und blendend weiBe Zahne zeigt. Ihr voiles lichtbraunes Haar flatten in zuriickgestrichenen Locken in einen vollen, feisten, schneeweiBen Nacken, der wie zum Kopfen gemacht ist. 3 4 3 If the women of Die Poeten were uniformly beautiful, they were also uniformly depicted as shallow thinkers, entirely preoccupied with the men of GrunschloB. Only two women challenged this generalization to some degree: Camilla and Julia. Camilla was described as having "viel Verstand, faBt sehr schnell und ist munter uber und uber."3 4 4 Valerius was drawn to her because of her intellect as well as her appearance. Even so, Camilla's letters 3 4 0Laube, Die Poeten, I, 44-46. These descriptions once again reveal the degree to which Laube was indebted to the language and imagery of the early Romantic writers, especially in his use of extravagant metaphors and classical analogies. *4lIbid, I, 59. M2Ibid, I, 132. M3Ibid, II, 18-19. M4Ibid., II, 18. 142 revealed no great intellect, but rather a near-total preoccupation with holding on to Valerius at all costs.345 However, Laube's characterization of Julia created the image of a far more complex woman who was capable of a much deeper understanding of the issues surrounding free love and the emancipation of women. Julia's letters to her mother revealed the degree to which she was capable of understanding the complex problems of her era: .. .nur die starksten und edelsten Weiber einen Uebergang zu besserem freierem Gesellschaftsleben dadurch bilden konnten, da6 sie sich der Ehe nicht unterwurfen, die neuen Begriffe aber auf alle Weise unterstiitzten, weil nach der politischen Revolution die sociale vor den Thoren lage, durch welche das Weib eine gesellschaftliche Stellung erlangen wiirde. Das Christenthum habe das Weib nur zur Halfte frei gemacht, sie miisse es ganz werden.3 4 6 Nonetheless, these ideas were not conceived by Julia herself. Rather, they had been explained to her by Valerius and in the exposition which followed she confessed that "ich verstehe wenig oder gar nichts davon, und sie wiirden mich wie alles Andern beunruhigen."347 Thus even this brief intimation that the women of GrunschloB were capable of understanding the revolutionary nature of their social situation was eventually disproved. Though Laube's Saint-Simonian society was at best incomplete, he nonetheless came closer than any of the other Young German writers to appreciating the possibility of such a development. Though the inadequate texturing of the female characters leaves the contemporary reader with the impression that Laube was describing a personal fantasy rather 3 4 5Camilla to Julia, ibid., I, 75-89; Camilla to Julia, I, 151-159; Camilla to Ludovico, II, 36-39; Camilla to Alberta, II, 81-83 and II, 118-122; Camilla to Valerius, II, 161-166; Camilla to Valerius, II, 182-185. M6Ibid., II, 53-54. U1lbid., II, 54. 143 than creating a new world, in his own era, as flawed as the characterizations might have been, Laube must be credited with advancing a revolutionary new conception of the relationship between man and woman. However, Gutzkow's admonition that Laube tended towards dilettantism and failed to explore the full potential of his words, 3 4 8 seems to be an accurate appraisal of his efforts to construct a Saint-Simonian society. Moreover, subsequent writings by Laube reveal the degree to which his fascination with the world of the Saint-Simonians represented a passing phase in his personal development.349 4. Ludolf Wienbarg wrote very little on the subject of women, so little in fact that one could legitimately conclude that he paid no attention to the writings of the women of his era. He did join with Gutzkow in inviting Bettina von Arnim to collaborate with them in the production of the Deutsche Revue. However, it remains unclear to what extent this occurred at Gutzkow's insistence. Wienbarg did offer an opinion on the emancipation of women in an 1835 essay entitled "In Sachen der deutchen [sic] Weiber gegen die deutchen [sic] Manner," 3 5 0 part of the collection of essays which Wienbarg published under the title Wanderungen durch den Thierkreis. For Wienbarg the emancipation of women was inseparably linked to the religious 3 4 8See for example Karl Gutzkow, "Liebesbriefe. Novelle von Heinrich Laube," Phonix: Fruhlingszeitung fur Deutschland, Literaturblatt Nr. 25 (27.6.1835), 598-599. 3 4 9See Chapter Four for a more detailed treatment of this issue. 3 5 0 Ludolf Wienbarg, "In Sachen der deutchen [sic] Weiber gegen die deutchen [sic] Manner," Wanderungen durch den Thierkreis (Hamburg: Hoffmann und Campe, 1835), 181-208; each of the essays in Wanderungen was listed under a sign of the zodiac (hence the title of the collection). This essay bore the name of Sagittarius (der Schiitz), the Archer. 144 questions of his age, in particular to the current state of Christianity versus the original intent of the faith. Wienbarg believed that the state of servitude in which the women of his era found themselves was entirely due to the political motivations of the papacy.351 Since its inception the papacy had arbitrarily been making laws for their followers which denied the true nature of femininity and which emphasized the dark secrets of the female sex. This had led men to mistrust women and force them into an unnaturally subordinate role, a situation which would not be easy to rectify. Wienbarg saw no hope for improving the status of women in the Saint-Simonian emancipation programme. Ridiculing the Saint-Simonian quest for the one perfect woman, Wienbarg argued that the goals of the French sect were laughable. "Bei keiner Sekte trug das Lacherliche mehr die Schleppe des Erhabenen."352 Wienbarg did, nonetheless, see some hope in the future. The emancipation of women would be an integral part of the achievement of a broader programme of emancipation for all oppressed groups. For the time being Wienbarg asked all women to allow him to be their voice in the struggle for emancipation and asked all men to reflect upon the important role which women, as wives and mothers, had played in the development of society. "Denkt nur an Gdthe's Mutter. Man sieht schon aus ihren Briefen, dafi die Poesie ihres Sohnes aus ihrem Herzen keimt." 3 5 3 In the interim, Wienbarg requested that women remain patient until the time was right for men to rectify the situation: 35lIbid, 198. *52Ibid., 200-201. 3"lbid., 204. 145 O Weiber, tragt und duldet uns feige Despoten noch eine Weile. Freilich stent's in eurer Macht, uns sammt und sonders aus dem Hause und aus Deutschland zu jagen.... Aber lafit Gnade vor Recht ergehen. Wir gedenken, an unserer Besserung zu arbeiten, und werden uns bemiihen, nicht allzuschimpflich von euch abzustechen. Und sind wir wieder, was unsere Vater, und haben wieder Muth zum Muthe und Muth zur Freiheit und freie Hand zu schalten und zu walten, dann wollen wir euer Loos auch burgerlich verbessern, gleich dem Loose aller Unterdriickten und an Recht und Freiheit Gekrankten.354 Wienbarg's comments on the emancipation of women would thus seem to place him closer to the opinions of Mundt than those of Gutzkow. Women would have to wait for the leading male intellectuals of the era to effect their emancipation. In his essays, Wienbarg seldom made reference to individual women. Generally women were only referred to as a social group, as in the quotation above. In "Das goldene Kalb," however, a short story published in Wanderungen durch den Thierkreis355 a woman named Mathilde F. provided the focal point around which the story unfolded. Mathilde F. was identified by Wienbarg as an acquaintance whose charming and mysterious, even implausible, nature had continually amazed him.356 She was so remarkable that Wienbarg noted that if he was the father of the Saint-Simonians (presumably either Henri de Saint Simon or, more likely, Prosper Enfantin), upon meeting Mathilde he would believe that she was the one true woman for whom the Saint-Simonians had been waiting—the mother of the movement. Together with 3i4Ibid, 207-208. 355Prior to the official publication of Wanderungen durch den Thierkreis, "Das goldene Kalb," was excerpted by Gutzkow in Phonix: Fruhlingszeitung fur Deutschland. Excerpts were published in each daily issue from 14.07.1835 to 23.07.1835. 356Ludolf Wienbarg, "Das goldene Kalb," Wanderungen durch den Thierkreis (Hamburg: Hoffmann und Campe, 1835), 43! This story was listed under the zodiac sign of Taurus (der Stier). 146 Enfantin, they would create the one true union between male and female—the "couple revelateur."357 On the other hand Wienbarg argued that i f he were a Catholic poet he would likely see in Mathilde the appearance of a new Madonna. 3 5 8 The form of "Das goldene Kalb" is unusual in that Mathilde's letters to Laura H . provide the background material for a first-person commentary by Wienbarg on the socio-political situation of his era. In the first letter359 Mathilde described the situation in which she found herself and discussed the position of her father, a banker who had recently entered into the service of the monarchy.360 Mathilde decried the materialistic dreams of her father who boasted to his acquaintances that an elegant lamp had cost forty gold coins, but could not afford one penny for oil to put in the lamp. Meanwhile the king devoted all of his time to writing meaningless prayers which failed to illuminate the life of the people.3 6 1 The letter continued with Mathilde's observations on the city in which she and her father lived. Just beyond her window she saw much misery: the 'beggars-palace' where a number of poor families were forced to live together, and the tailor who was still working at three in the morning just to keep his family alive. Mathilde resolved to take money to the tailor in the morning, but before she could do so the man committed suicide out of desperation. This 357Ibid 35*Ibid. 359Ibid, 29-34. 3 6 0The location of this scenario is not identified in the early letter but subsequent references place the story in Norway. 361-. 'Wienbarg, "Das goldene Kalb," 31. 147 marked the end of Mathilde's first letter. In a subsequent letter Mathilde provided more information about herself. She explained that her father was trying to arrange her marriage to a nobleman from the 'first family' in the land. 3 6 2 She commented, however, that she would rather jump in the river than marry the count: Das Leben wird mir immer mehr vergallt. Bewahre mir deine Freundschaft. Diese nur, und daran zweifle ich nicht, sprach aus deinem Briefe. Du mochtest deine Freundin als gliickliche Gattin des Grafen in deiner nachsten Nahe sehen. Laura, ich liebe dich unendlich, und wiinschte mit Dir leben und sterben zu konnen. Aber der Weg zu Dir fiihrt mich uber den Kirchhof, und was frommt es Deiner Zartlichkeit, eine Leiche zu umarmen? Also dariiber kein Wort mehr.363 Mathilde's misery continued to unfold in subsequent letters, eventually culminating in a full-blown spiritual crisis, similar to the crises which both Gutzkow and Mundt had created for their most famous female characters. At the root of Mathilde's dilemma was her inability to comprehend the unfairness of the current social order in which the poor suffered endlessly amidst the conspicuous consumption of the wealthy. Finally Mathilde concluded that the poor would be rewarded in heaven: Christus ist nicht fur die Reichen gestorben, nur den Armen ist sein Blut am Kreuze herabgetraufelt, nur den Armen hat er die Pforten des FJimmelreiches erschlossen — den Reichen nicht.... Wahrlich, redet er seine Junger an, wahrlich ich sage euch, ein Reicher wird schwerlich in's Himmelreich kommen. Und weiter sage ich euch, es ist leichter, daf3 ein Kameel durch ein Nadelohr gehe, denn dafi ein Reicher in's Reich Gottes komme.3 6 4 "Ibid, 59-60. aIbid, 60. "Ibid, 64-65. 148 Unlike Gutzkow's Wally, who found suicide to be the only answer to her spiritual crisis, or Mundt's Madonna, who found solace in the Protestant Church, Mathilde was momentarily saved from despair by the intercession of Karl B , the poverty-stricken son of a shepherd who shared her sense of social injustice. Karl offered to sail away with Mathilde so that they might create a true union based on their shared belief in a more egalitarian society. Mathilde agreed. However, the ship carrying Karl was lost at sea thus ending her chance for happiness and bringing the story to a close.3 6 5 Mathilde's final letter indicated that she had lost hope and was destined to remain a prisoner in her father's house, at the mercy of his decisions regarding her future. In Mathilde F. Wienbarg created a woman of great complexity, evidently more intelligent than Gutzkow's Wally and Mundt's Maria, and gifted with a sense of social justice which was entirely lacking in the characterizations of Mundt and Gutzkow. Mathilde's theological doubts and her social conscience were products of her own intelligence, whereas dominant male characters provided the ideas which preoccupied both Wally and Maria. Nonetheless, there was no satisfactory resolution for Mathilde F. Once her escape route was blocked she remained at the mercy of her father's determination to carry through the arranged marriage with the count. Such a conclusion was entirely consistent, however, with Wienbarg's previously stated belief that the emancipation of women could only come as part of a greater process of socio-political emancipation from the stultifying effects of Church and monarchy. So long as the traditional system remained firmly in place women such as Mathilde F. would be 365Ibid., 72. 149 unable to secure their own emancipation. 5. The picture which emerges out of the confrontation between the writers of the so-called Young German school and the question of female emancipation is a complex one. It is evident, however, even in this preliminary survey, that the assertions of the feminist literary critics simply do not hold up to close scrutiny. Women writers were not dismissed outright as incapable of serious literature, they did not receive harsher reviews than their male counterparts and, at least in the case of Bettina von Arnim and Rahel Varnhagen von Ense, they played far more than a minor role in literary production. The only consistent bias demonstrated by the Young German authors was an opposition to poor quality literature and in this the gender of the author was irrelevant. However, the writers of Young Germany tended to consider each female writer whom they encountered differently. Gutzkow appeared to have been the most willing to consider female authors as capable of great literature, yet Mundt was the only one of the so-called Young Germans who permitted a female writer to speak for herself in his journal. Laube did not consider women incapable of serious literature, but his ideal literature would have combined both feminine and masculine tendencies. There was thus a considerable difference of opinion among the 'Young Germans' regarding their female contemporaries. Turning to the fictional characters created by the Young Germans one finds a similar diversity of attitudes. Both Mundt and Gutzkow were clearly aware of the limitations which Biedermeier society placed upon women, an awareness which they conveyed to their audience through their female characters. Yet while Gutzkow allowed his audience to understand the depth of the psychological crisis which this society provoked in women such as Wally, Mundt's 150 readers were given no opportunity to hear Maria's thoughts on this subject. Instead Maria retreated into a world of sensualism, an act which Mundt applauded, only to be saved in the end by her discovery of the Protestant faith, a very traditional resolution. Mundt's readers might therefore have concluded that no fundamental changes were necessary to the existing social order. Gutzkow's readers, however, could not fail to see the catastrophic consequences of the repressive Biedermeier social order. Similarly Wienbarg's depiction of Mathilde F. provided a clear picture of the negative repercussions of the traditional social order. Laube's characters, however, seemed to be designed to titillate his readers, rather than offer a carefully thought out solution to the key social problems of his era. The Biedermeier period was an important transitional era in the search for a new conception of the female social sphere. However, the era contained many contradictory impulses. As products of this period the 'Young German' authors could not help but mirror these contradictory influences. Each of the so-called Young Germans expressed an interest in and a concern for the emancipation of women. They were also aware that the women of their era were already moving beyond the traditional realm of Kinder, Kirche und Ktiche and that this process was likely to continue. Likewise there appeared to be, in varying degrees, an awareness of the psychological ramifications of Biedermeier attitudes towards women. However, Gutzkow, Laube, Mundt and Wienbarg disagreed as to how or even whether the process of emancipation would take place. Because of the nature of the social transformation which Karl Gutzkow envisioned and the means, namely literature, by which he assumed that the transformation would be achieved, he was able to allow women to take an active role in the struggle for emancipation. Gutzkow 151 was able to admit that women such as George Sand and Bettina von Arnim could be equal participants in the creation of a new social order. Ludolf Wienbarg, however, denied that role to women, insisting that their emancipation would be brought about as part of the broader campaign for human emancipation which was already underway led by men such as himself. This belief also implied that there were no concerns specific to women in the struggle for emancipation and that political emancipation would address all of the outstanding injustices of the age, a somewhat naive assumption that Theodor Mundt rejected outright in his discussion of the struggle for emancipation. Mundt did agree with Wienbarg that women would not be the primary agents in the emancipation process. His account of the state of the emancipation struggle indicated clearly that he viewed female-led movements as an invitation to disaster. He thus placed the burden of emancipation on men such as Theodor von Hippel and the Saint-Simonians. However, though Mundt advocated emancipation on the Saint-Simonian model he appeared to be unable to accept the possibility of the fully emancipated women whom the Saint-Simonians described. There was thus a lingering conservatism evident in Mundt's conception of the new female sphere which was not present in the work of either Wienbarg or Gutzkow. Nonetheless, in his consideration of the Saint-Simonian model Mundt would appear to stand closer to Heinrich Laube than to Gutzkow or Wienbarg, both of whom rejected such models outright. Unlike Mundt Laube went considerably further in exploring the possibilities of a Saint-Simonian society. Yet here too one finds a somewhat one-sided advocacy of Saint-Simonian ideals. Free love, free choice and personal happiness were celebrated in the male characters. Yet the romanticized characters which Laube constructed made his female characters appear to 152 be at most reluctant participants in this new social order, an indication that Laube had not entirely abandoned the traditional beliefs of his era concerning the role and position of women. Moreover, Laube's female characters displayed the lowest level of awareness of the psychological implications of their condition and the most frivolous attitude towards the new social values advanced by the men of their society. This again reflected Laube's rudimentary understanding of the key issues facing the women of the Biedermeier period. Despite the diversity of attitudes expressed by the 'Young Germans,' Eda Sagarra's assertion that they were one of the few feminist groups that Vormdrz Germany produced is questionable.366 Certainly their awareness of the problems facing the women of their era was an important step forward in the struggle for emancipation. The fact, however, that only Karl Gutzkow was willing to recognize that women could play a role in their own emancipation, would seem to cast doubt upon the Young Germans as proto-feminists.367 Again it would appear that though all four men expressed an interest in the question of female emancipation, the so-called Young Germans held widely divergent views on this issue. These differences of opinion can be seen even more clearly in the 'Young German' writings on religious issues. Sagarra, Tradition and Revolution, 20. 3 6 7 Even Gutzkow later denied that female emancipation was viable, arguing in his Zur Philosophie der Geschichte (Hamburg: Hoffmann & Campe, 1836) that the emancipation of women was the silliest idea his age had ever thought up. Cited in Ruth-Ellen Boetcher-Joeres' text notes to Wally, the Skeptic, 114n. 153 CHAPTER FOUR: Religious Emancipation and Saint-Simonianism in the Works of the Young German Writers. The connection between Young Germany and the question of religious emancipation is a crucial one. The so-called Young Germans lived at a time of considerable religious change. Doubts concerning the validity of Christianity in the contemporary world had appeared full-blown in the early nineteenth century along with calls for various forms of religious emancipation. The issue of religious tolerance was viewed by many as a necessary step towards a more modern world, yet examples of intolerance remained abundant. Perhaps predictably, it would be religious intolerance which provoked the draconian reaction of the Mannheim tribunal towards Karl Gutzkow's Wally, die Zweiflerin. This reaction led to the total suppression all of Gutzkow's writings and also of four other authors who, in the final analysis, had little or nothing to do with the content of the offending work. Clearly then, the 'Young Germans' were perceived to be a very real threat to the institutions of Christianity. The apparent challenge presented by the work of the 'Young Germans' to the religious status quo has been one of the most studied aspects of the young literature. Most conclusions on Young Germany and religion derive from the pioneering work of E . M . Butler whose 1926 thesis alleged that the Young Germans represented the first, and likely only, intrusion of the Saint-Simonian religion into Germany.368 Despite Butler's narrow definition of Saint-3 6 8 E . M . Butler, The Saint-Simonian Religion in Germany: A Study of the Young German Movement, 2nd Edition (New York: Howard Fertig, 1968); Butler's thesis rests on a relatively narrow definition of Saint-Simonianism. Though she acknowledged the social aspects of the doctrine, including the idea of possibilism and the dominant role of technology in 154 Simonianism, most subsequent historians of the Young German movement have accepted her conclusions without question. Eda Sagarra argues, with specific reference to Butler, that Saint-Simonianism provided an important part of the overall programme of the Young Germans.369 Ernst Bramsted commends Butler's interpretation, adding that Gutzkow's Wally is perhaps the best reflection of the Saint-Simonian spirit of the Young Germans.370 Paul Lawrence Rose, while rejecting Butler's depiction of the Young German programme as a continuation of the liberal political goals championed by Ludwig Borne, says nothing about her primary assertion— -that the Young Germans were first and foremost Saint-Simonians.371 Butler's thesis has been accepted for so long and with such unanimity that historians apparently no longer question its premises or the evidence she used to reach her conclusions. Butler's thesis, as convincing as it can sound at times, was based on very limited society, she excluded these issues from her analysis of the Young German works. Instead, Butler was concerned with only those aspects of the doctrine which relate to the new Christianity that the Saint-Simonians hoped to create. Specifically, Butler was looking for evidence in the works of the Young German authors of the rehabilitation of the material world, in particular the gratification of human need in the here and now, in the flesh as well as the spirit. Butler was also anxious to demonstrate that the Young Germans supported the idea that men and women, while different, were nonetheless equal, and that, under the new religion, men and women would unite out of love, personal preference, and free choice—not the property-family links common to bourgeois marriages during the Biedermeier period. 3 6 9 Eda Sagarra, Tradition and Revolution: German Literature and Society 1830-1890 (London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1971), 138-149. 3 7 0Ernest K . Bramsted, Aristocracy and the Middle-Classes in Germany: Social Types in German Literature 1830-1900 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1937), 78. Ironically Butler concluded that the gloomy pessimism of Wally was concrete proof that this work was not written in the Saint-Simonian tradition; Butler, The Saint-Simonian Religion, 307-308. 3 7 1 Paul Lawrence Rose, Revolutionary Anti-Semitism in Germany from Kant to Wagner (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1990), 172. 155 evidence and a series of questionable generalizations. In Butler's chapter on Ludolf Wienbarg, for example, she argued that while Wienbarg's angle of approach differed from that of the Saint-Simonians there was nothing in his ideas "which actually runs counter to the Saint-Simonian creed."3 7 2 The fact that Wienbarg did not contradict the Saint-Simonians can hardly be taken as evidence that he was an adherent of the doctrine. Likewise, Butler saw in Wienbarg's work only "a remarkable resemblance to Enfantin's ideal, as interpreted by Heine." 3 7 3 Resemblance certainly cannot be taken as proof of Wienbarg's Saint-Simonianism. In fact in the entire body of Wienbarg's work Butler was only able to find two overt references to the doctrines of Saint-Simon. The first was a single reference from Wienbarg's 1835 collection of essays Wanderungen durch den Thierkreis which stated: "[n]icht der Mann allein, Mann und Weib sind das gesellschaftliche Individuum."374 Few would argue that this is a virtual paraphrase of Prosper Enfantin; however, Butler entirely ignored the context of the passage. Wienbarg was paraphrasing the Saint-Simonians in order to demonstrate that the social order that they projected could never offer a viable solution to the problems afflicting his society. Wienbarg's second reference to the doctrines of Saint-Simon came much later, in an 1840 review of Heinrich Laube's new novella Jagdbrevier: Soil ich von Laube als von einem Reprasentanten der Emancipation des 3 7 2Butler, The Saint-Simonian Religion, 408. 313Ibid, 411; emphasis added. 3 7 4 Ludolf Wienbarg, "In Sachen der deutchen [sic] Weiber gegen die deutchen [sic] Manner," Wanderungen durch den Thierkreis (Hamburg: Hoffmann und Campe, 1835), 201; Butler, The Saint-Simonian Religion, 414. 156 Fleisches und der Frauen reden? Was an diesen Ideen sich groblichster Missdeutung aussetzte, die prahlende Theorie, das grelle Aushangeschild der Namen, der Schein des Societatartigen, als handelte es sich um die Stiftung einer Gesellschaft zur Abschaffung der Sclaverei, die Alles war undeutsch, und das Wahre daran der allgemeine Gedanke, dass alle Menschennatur mit dem schwindenden historischen Druck sich immer mehr zur Ganzheit und Freiheit seiner besonderen Erscheinung entwickle, in sich volliger und selbststandiger werde und aus Kraft zur Schonheit sich entfalte...375 This ringing denial of the Saint-Simonian position did not dissuade Butler; she attributed this attack to the first faint sign of Wienbarg's mental deterioration and to the psychological impact of the proscription of Young Germany.376 There is no doubt that both of these issues affected Wienbarg and if Butler had demonstrated a pattern of Saint-Simonian sympathies in Wienbarg's writings prior to 1835 then her argument might have been convincing. This pattern, however, did not exist. While Butler's analysis of Wienbarg was the weakest of the five studies, a fact which she herself acknowledged,377 similar evidentiary problems plague each part of her argument. Substantial doubt is therefore cast upon her claim that the so-called Young Germans were, without exception, adherents of the doctrines of Henri de Saint-Simon and Prosper Enfantin. The intent of the above discussion is not to deny that the Young Germans were deeply concerned with the religious developments of their age. It is simply to argue that this involvement was not solely, and in some cases perhaps not at all, predicated upon the doctrines 3 7 5 Ludolf Wienbarg, "Heinrich Laube, Jagdbrevier," Literarische und kritische Blatter der Borsen-Halle (19.12. 1840), 2; Butler, The Saint-Simonian Religion, 426-427. 3 7 6Butler, The Saint-Simonian Religion, 415. 317Ibid, 428. 157 of Saint-Simon and Enfantin. In her haste to find evidence of Saint-Simonian thought in the works of the Young Germans, Butler overlooked the fact that the Saint-Simonians were not the only group concerned with the rehabilitation of matter.378 Several recent studies have argued that Heinrich Heine's thoughts on religion and philosophy in Germany ultimately had more influence on the Young Germans than the ideas of the Saint-Simonians.379 This study will also argue that the thought of Friedrich Schleiermacher was enormously influential in shaping the political beliefs of several of the 'Young Germans.' The late eighteenth century saw the development of several overlapping currents in German religious thought. The first current was characterized by a return to the pantheistic doctrines of Benedict Spinoza (1632-1677). The pantheists had argued that God was identical with the world, manifested in the plants, the animals and, most importantly, in man. Because man was a thinking creature who knew how to distinguish himself from nature, divinity I have chosen the term 'rehabilitation of matter' over the more traditionally Saint-Simonian 'rehabilitation of the flesh,' since both Heinrich Heine (from whom at least one of the Young Germans seems to have taken his religious inspiration) and Theodor Mundt emphasized the former term to underscore their distinctiveness from French materialism. Heinrich Heine, History of Religion and Philosophy in Germany, ed. Paul Lawrence Rose (North Queensland: James Cook University, 1982); originally published in several volumes in Germany under the title Der Salon. 3 7 9See for example Hannelore Burchardt-Dose, Das junge Deutschland und die Familie: zum literarischen Engagement in der Restaurationsepoche (Frankfurt am Main: Verlag Peter D. Lang, GmbH, 1979), 240-246. Butler in contrast saw Heine's ideas almost exclusively as a product of his early fascination with the Saint-Simonians and thus argued that contact with Heine was essentially the same as contact with the doctrines of Saint-Simon; Butler, The Saint-Simonian Religion, 88-169 and 407. Few contemporary historians, however, would argue that Heine's philosophy of religion was entirely a product of his contact with Prosper Enfantin, contact which did not begin until the early 1830s. 158 attained self-consciousness through man. While the pantheism of Spinoza had been effectively discredited throughout much of the eighteenth century, it experienced a powerful revival at the turn of the nineteenth century, so much so that Heinrich Heine would claim in his History of Religion and Philosophy in Germany that pantheism was the secret religion of Germany.381 The culmination of pantheistic thought can be found in Heine's writings. There is some evidence to support the claim that Heine's pantheism, at least in the first half of the 1830s, was inspired by the work of the Saint-Simonians. His dedication of Zur Geschichte der Religion und Philosophic to Prosper Enfantin must certainly be taken as a sign that he was intrigued by his ideas. There was, however, only one direct reference to the Saint-Simonians in Heine's Geschichte der Religion und Philosophic: The Saint-Simonians understood and wanted something of the kind [promotion of the material world], but they stood on an unfavourable soil, and the Materialism which surrounded, suppressed them. They were better understood in Germany, for Germany is the most propitious soil for Pantheism.382 By the end of his treatise on religion, however, Heine seemed to have moved beyond the simple equation of pantheism with Saint-Simonianism towards a more complex pantheistic doctrine, which was heavily influenced by G.W.F. Hegel. In the closing passages Heine observed that sensualism was part of the progressive Hegelian philosophy in which nature and 3 8 0Heine, History of Religion and Philosophy, 53-58. 3UIbid., 60-61. 3S1Ibid., 62. 159 spirit were reconciled. Through the steady progress of history various religious systems had been tested. From Catholicism to Lutheranism, through the idealism of Leibnitz and Christian Wolff, Germans had experimented with all of these faiths and had found each of them to be in some way lacking. By the time of Hegel, however, they had arrived once again at their 'secret religion'—the union of the spirit and the flesh which was achieved through pantheism. Heine's thoughts on philosophy and religion were definitely influential in shaping the views of at least one of the Young German authors. Heinrich Laube maintained an active communication with Heine and wrote frequently of the tremendous influence which Heine had had upon him. In December 1833 Laube was able to review the first volume of Der Salon prior to its official publication in Germany in January 1834. Laube's review commended Heine's ability to convey the entire scope of historical development in a few carefully chosen words. 3 8 4 He also remarked on Heine's exploration of the doctrine of sensualism and claimed that he himself had advocated a similar philosophy in his recently completed work Das junge Europa3*5 However, Laube's most flattering remarks were reserved for the way in which Heine presented his own pantheism to the reader. Laube noted that, "[z]u einem besonderen Vergniigen hat es sich Heine gemacht, seinen Pantheismus gereimt und ungereimt zum 3aIbUL, 122; emphasis added. 3 8 4Heinrich Laube, "Der Salon, von H . Heine. Erster Band. Hamburg, bei Hoffmann u. Campe. 1834," Zeitung fur die elegante Welt, Nr. 248 (19.12.1833), 989-992. 3S5Ibid., 991. Laube's reference was to the first installment of Das junge Europa: Die Poeten (1833). The final two volumes had not been written at this time. 160 Vorschein zu bringen.... [D]ie Poesie hindurch... ist eine kostbare Perle aus der Nordsee." While Heine's work was undoubtedly influential, other religious currents were equally important in shaping the attitudes of the Young German authors towards religion. As discussed in Chapter One, the teachings of Friedrich Schleiermacher had a great influence on Karl Gutzkow and Ludolf Wienbarg.3 8 7 Schleiermacher's On Religion: Speeches to Its Cultural Despisers argued that religion was a highly individualistic conception, a communion with the organic unity of the universe which could be articulated by any number of religions, none of which had all of the possible revelations of the truth. Schleiermacher was greatly influenced by Friedrich Schlegel in the formulation of On Religion™ Both men saw religion and art as the only two areas which view the universe as an organic whole in opposition to the utilitarian and materialist ethic of civil society. Schleiermacher's religion was thus egalitarian, cosmopolitan and rehabilitated the natural world. It has also been viewed by some historians as an attempt to bridge the gap between the realities of public life in the late eighteenth century Prussian state Ibid., 992. For his part Heine maintained a friendly correspondence with Laube, remarking in a July 1833 letter that Laube was one of the few men who truly understood the deeper questions which his work explored. Heine to Laube; Paris 10.07.1833 quoted in Jan-Christoph Hauschild (Hrsg.), Verboten! Das Junge Deutschland 1835. Literatur und Zensur im Vormdrz (Diisseldorf: Droste Verlag, 1985), 65. 3 8 7Gutzkow produced a new commentary on Friedrich Schleiermacher's preface to Schlegel's Lucinde entitled Schleiermachers Vertraute Briefe uber die 'Lucinde.' Mit einer Vorrede von Karl Gutzkow (Hamburg: Hoffmann und Campe, 1835). On the contact between Gutzkow, Wienbarg and Schleiermacher see Chapter 1(4). 3 8 8Schlegel lived with Schleiermacher from December 1797 until September 1799 during which time On Religion was conceived and written. 161 and the ideals of the French Revolution. The re-emergence of pantheistic doctrines was not the only major religious development of this period. Standing alongside the pantheism of the late-eighteenth and early-nineteenth centuries was the second major religious phenomenon in Germany: the resurgence of pietism. Inspired by the writings of Philipp Jacob Spener (1635-1705), the pietists advocated a focus on an awakened ministry, prayer meetings, increased devotional and charitable activity, and an emphasis on one of the key tenets of Luther's teachings: the priesthood of all believers. Spener was also a strong believer in the second coming and therefore argued in favour of a complete withdrawal from worldly, materialistic activities and of a descent into a spiritual asceticism. The emphasis on the irrational and the asceticism of pietism appealed to many writers of the late eighteenth and early nineteenth century, including Gotthold Lessing and Novalis. Koppel Pinson has argued that German pietism, in both the Reformed Churches and the Lutheran Church, represented German Protestantism's return to its roots, to the original intent of Martin Luther's teachings.390 However, divisions among the pietists resulted in the creation of two factions: the traditional pietists who emphasized subjective religious experience and the unity of the Christian brotherhood, and the Fundamentalist pietists who believed in the brutality of man in the state of nature and therefore demanded his complete surrender to the absolute, literal truth of the biblical revelation. The latter group, led by Ernst Hengstenberg 3 8 9Frederick C. Beiser, Enlightenment, Revolution and Romanticism: The Genesis of Modern German Political Thought, J 790-J800 (Cambridge, M A : Harvard University Press, 1992), 240-244. 3 9 0 Koppel S. Pinson, Pietism as a Factor in the Rise of German Nationalism (New York: Columbia University Press, 1934), 13. 162 (1802-1869), equated any opposition to the established political authorities as a sinful rebellion against an order which had been divinely ordained.391 In varying degrees pietism, the pantheistic doctrines expressed by Heine, and the individualistic religious conceptions put forward by Schleiermacher and the early Romantic writers exerted influence upon the Young Germans.392 However, each of the Young German authors approached the key questions related to religion and society in a very different way. 3 9 3 In addition, as one moves through the literature on religion produced by Gutzkow, Laube, John E. Toews, Hegelianism: The Path Toward Dialectical Humanism, 1805-1841 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1980), 245-251. Schleiermacher was a supporter of traditional pietism but rejected the Fundamentalists' dogmatic insistence on the literal truth of the Gospels. 3 9 2Historians who have considered the religious forces operating on the Young Germans sometimes include D.F. StrauB as a major influence. StrauB published the highly controversial Das Leben Jesu in 1835, arguing that the gospels did not have the credibility that a historian should require of his sources. Eitel Dobert has argued that this was a crucial influence on Gutzkow as he wrote Wally. Eitel Dobert, Karl Gutzkow und seine Zeit (Bern: Francke, 1968), 82-83. However, over forty years earlier Franz Schneider had produced an article that convincingly argued that Gutzkow could not have read StrauB' work because publication problems delayed the appearance of the work until late summer 1835—after the publication of Wally. Thus it is highly unlikely that StrauB' work had any significant impact on any of the Young Germans in the period prior to the ban. Franz Schneider, "Gutzkows Wally und D.F. StrauB Leben Jesu: eine Richtigstellung," The Germanic Review, 2 (April 1926), 115-119. 3 9 3 In the period after 1815 the relationship between Church and State became an important issue for many reform-minded groups. As the bureaucratic states grew in size they attempted increasingly to bring the Churches under their control. The Stuttgart government, for example, attempted to prescribe the length of sermons and when confessions could be heard. This in turn provoked considerable opposition to state interference in religious matters. The so-called Young Germans, however, remained silent on matters of Church and State preferring instead to focus on the larger issue of the relevance of religion in a rapidly modernizing society. On the issue of Church and State see R . M . Bigler, The Politics of German Protestantism: The Rise of the Protestant Church Elite in Prussia, 1815-1848 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1972). 163 Mundt and Wienbarg it becomes clear that some issues were of greater importance than others to each man. Thus it is again impossible to establish a single Young German position on religious emancipation. 1. As with other issues, Ludolf Wienbarg seldom wrote on specifically religious matters. In Wanderungen durch den Thierkreis he did, however, include several essays treating the state of religion in his time. 3 9 4 In addition, his comments on Gutzkow's preface to Schleiermacher's "Vertraute Briefe" on Schlegel's Lucinde395 provide additional clarification of Wienbarg's personal views on religion, views which appear to have been influenced heavily by the pantheistic doctrines of Friedrich Schleiermacher. In "Wollust und Grausamkeit" Wienbarg contemptuously rejected the God whom the majority of people accepted: Und fiber dem ungeheuren Schmerze der Schofung [sic], die sich selbst zerstort, erhebt sich der einsame Thron eines Wesens, dessen gefuhllose Ewigkeit durch keine Welle der Lust und des Schmerzes ausgehohlt wird. In achter Tyrannenlaune schuf er die Welt, um sich an dem tragischen Gaukelspiel des ringenden fluchtigen Daseins ironisch zu weiden. Er zundete die Brautfackeln an, lud die Gaste ein und lieB die Bluthochzeit beginnen, die niemals aufhort. Er selber lachelt vom hohen sichern Balkon der Unsterblichkeit gottlich ruhig in die weite ewige Bartolomausnacht heraus.... Ihr Gott ist schrecklich heilig, schrecklich ewig, schrecklich selig. Er is nicht der meinige.396 In particular Ludolf Wienbarg, "Wollust und Grausamkeit," Wanderungen durch den Thierkreis (Hamburg: Hoffmann und Campe, 1835), 75-101; Wienbarg, "Das goldene Kalb," ibid., 30-72. "Wollust und Grausamkeit" was placed under the sign of Gemini, the twins, evidently in order to indicate the inseparability of lust and cruelty; "Das goldene Kalb" was listed under the sign of Taurus, the bull. 3 9 5 Ludolf Wienbarg, "Lucinde, Schleiermacher, und Gutzkow," Zur neuesten Literatur (Mannheim: C. Lowenthal, 1835); (Berlin: Aufbau, 1964), 272-280. 3 9 6Wienbarg, "Wollust und Grausamkeit," 93-96. 164 Wienbarg's revulsion with this Christian God appears to be rooted in his inability to understand how any god could remain so aloof from worldly suffering. How could the Christian God abandon man to a fleeting and often miserable existence with only the promise of a better life after death? To Wienbarg this was intolerable; he expected that his God would share in both the pain and the pleasure of the world which he had created. Having thus thoroughly discredited the God of the present, Wienbarg went on to discuss his own beliefs regarding the nature of God, beliefs which even Butler has acknowledged add up to an extreme form of pantheism.397 Most importantly for Wienbarg, his God was a participatory figure who involved himself in the activities of both man and beast alike. His God suffered as nature suffered, rejoiced as nature rejoiced: Der Gott, an den ich glaube, theilt mit mir die Burde der Sterblichkeit, indem er zugleich meiner schwachen Brust einen Theil seiner Ewigkeit anvertraut. Er taucht sich in die Schmerzen und Freuden der Welt, er versenkt sich in die Leidenschaften und Triebe, er erniedrigt sich nicht allein zum Menschen, selbst zum Wurm und empfindet den Todesschmerz des unter meinen Fufien zertretenen Geschdpfes... Ja, ich wage es auszusprechen, Gottes ist die Gebrechlichkeit so gut als die Kraft, die fluchtige Lust sowohl als die ewige Seligkeit, der Tod sowohl als das ewige Leben; und nichts Ungdttliches gibt es auf der Welt als die absolute Schwache, die sich selbst verlaBt und daher auch von Gott verlassen wird. 3 9 8 The key to deciphering Wienbarg's personal religious philosophy lies in the phrase 'die sich selbst verlaBt und daher auch von Gott verlassen wird.' In this statement one can observe a fully developed pantheistic philosophy where God resided within every man. Just as Friedrich Butler, The Saint-Simonian Religion, 415. 'Wienbarg, "Wollust und Grausamkeit," 96-97. 165 Schleiermacher had argued, man carried the spirit of God within him and religion thus became a very individualistic communion with that spirit. Furthermore, one can also find in Wienbarg's writings evidence of the Romantic belief that the spiritual realm existed within the world of nature. This was most evident in Wienbarg's claim that God shared not only in the pains of mankind, but also shared in and experienced the sufferings of the lowly worm. God was thus made to be an integral part of the world of matter. "Wollust und Grausamkeit" concluded with a blatant attack on religions which advocated denial in this world: "Gebt euch nicht dem monchischen Glauben hin, Gott gefalliger und tugendhafter zu werden durch bloCe gewaltsame Schwachung und Unterdriickung eurer Leidenschaften."399 This comment can be read as an attack on the doctrines of both Catholicism and Lutheran pietism, with their advocacy of abstinence and the denial of pleasure in this world. Wienbarg went on to argue that God stood closer to man when he was in the throes of passion than when he prudishly denied himself pleasure. "Was ihr Laster scheltet, ist fast immer gottlicher, als eure Tugend, eure scheinheilige Erhabenheit, eure eunuchische Lasterlosigkeit."400 This overt celebration of sensualism, though interpreted by Butler as evidence of Wienbarg's Saint-Simonianism, was entirely consistent with a pantheistic world-view. If Wienbarg's God embraced the material world then it stood to reason that worldly passions would not have shamed or humiliated that God. 4 0 1 This was, however, a much '"Ibid., 100. mIbid 4 0 1There may have been another factor influencing Wienbarg's belief that one stood closer to God in lust than in virtue. As a doctoral candidate at Marburg, Wienbarg was a 166 stronger advocacy of pure sensualism than any of the other Young Germans ever expressed. Here again it would appear that Wienbarg drew much of his philosophy from Schleiermacher, a fact that becomes increasingly evident upon reading Wienbarg's essay on Schleiermacher's "Vertraute Briefe." Wienbarg's "Lucinde, Schleiermacher und Gutzkow" appeared in the middle of the Gutzkow-Menzel feud and therefore it was Wienbarg's defence of Gutzkow which drew the greatest attention at the time. The article is, however, equally interesting for historians seeking to understand Wienbarg's interpretation of Friedrich Schleiermacher. Wienbarg considered Schleiermacher's "Vertraute Briefe" to be the inspiration for a new doctrine of love. However, Schleiermacher's work was so radical that it had immediately been buried, condemned to obscurity until it was resurrected by Gutzkow. Schleiermacher's aim had been to save love from the lamentable state into which it had fallen: ... selbst auf das graue Papier fiel ein wundersamer traumerischer Glanz, ein widerscheinendes Rosenlicht von Kiissen... wohlbekannte liebende Gestalten schwebten flusternd und kosend an den Zweigen voriiber, Romeo mit Julie, Abalard mit Heloise, Petrarca mit Laura, und in der Mitte schritt der gottliche Schleiermacher, mit bekranztem Haar, umringt von Schulern und Schulerinnen, eifernd gegen die Unnatur der Herzen, gegen das heuchlerische Verderbnis der Sitten, gegen die unanstandige Priiderie der Weiber, gegen das Misere unserer heutigen Liebe, predigend mit kuhnem und keuschem Munde das hohe Evangelium einer Liebe, wie sie selbst ihn beseligte und wie sie nicht minder den ewigen Gesetzen der Natur also dem Standpunkt der fortgeriickten und entwickelten Menschheit angemessen erscheint.402 scholar of Plato who himself had struggled with the relationship between man and the spiritual realm. While it is commonly held that Plato advocated an extreme form of asceticism as the best way to commune with the spiritual strata, there was also a period when Plato argued that immersion in physical sensations was in fact the best way to reach the level of the One. Wienbarg, however, made no reference to Platonic justifications in his later religious writings. 4 0 2Wienbarg, "Lucinde, Schleiermacher und Gutzkow," 272-273. 167 Wienbarg clearly believed that Schleiermacher was an early proponent of the rehabilitation of matter. Indeed, the portion of the article devoted exclusively to Schleiermacher concluded that "[d]ie Liebe soil auferstehen, ihre zerstuckten Glieder soil ein neues Leben vereinigen."403 Wienbarg's attacks extended not only to the God of the present era and religions which advocated abstinence and self-denial instead of the rehabilitation of matter, but also to the contemporary Church and its priests. In "Das goldene Kalb" Wienbarg argued that the Church had been hopelessly corrupted. Its priests no longer preached the gospel from the mount. They were priests only in the sense that bourgeois society persisted in calling itself Christian. "Sie heiligen das Unheilige, den Zustand der Ungleichheit, den Christus verdammte."404 The inequality evident in bourgeois society and the corruption in the priesthood should play no role in a true religion. Though Wienbarg did not leave a large volume of writings on religious themes it is nonetheless possible to draw several conclusions regarding his personal religious philosophy and the inspiration which he drew from his contemporaries. Wienbarg clearly found much of his religious guidance in the early work of Friedrich Schleiermacher. However, the philosophy developed by Wienbarg was far more radical than most of Schleiermacher's writings. Wienbarg's was an extreme form of pantheism which called for the total resurrection of the material world. As such he was vehemently opposed to any religious doctrines, including Fundamentalist pietism and Catholicism, which focussed on other-worldly rewards. Beyond 4 0 3/fotf.,273. 4 0 4Wienbarg, "Das goldene Kalb," 65. 168 this, Wienbarg also objected to the degree of corruption which had entered the contemporary religions and to the fact that the clergy no longer taught the true Christian doctrine. This led Wienbarg to reject contemptuously the Christian Churches and the doctrines that they preached. 2. As opposed to Wienbarg who wrote relatively little on religion, Theodor Mundt left a considerable volume of work dealing with a variety of religious topics. Mundt commented on German anti-Semitism, on religious tolerance, on the state of Christianity in general, and specifically on the doctrines of Henri de Saint-Simon. In October 1835 Mundt remarked upon a series of events which seemed to him to be an irrational manifestation of anti-Semitism. Accusations had been levelled by Wolfgang Menzel and others that Gutzkow's publisher Carl Lowenthal, who was Jewish, was deliberately attempting to undermine Christianity by printing and distributing Wally, die Zweiflerin. According to his accusers, Lowenthal's Judaism drove him to attack Christianity at every opportunity. Mundt, however, denied such accusations strenuously and argued that Gutzkow, a Christian, must be held solely responsible for the content of his work and any of its destructive repercussions.405 In the same issue, Mundt remarked upon a startling occurrence in Hamburg. A well-known Hamburg coffee-house had closed its doors to Jews. To ensure that their clientele was 4 0 5Theodor Mundt, "Feuilleton," Literarischer Zodiacus (October 1835), 298. Such accusations were evidently common among the opponents of the Young Germans who sometimes referred to the movement as "Young Palestine." For more on this topic see Paul Lawrence Rose, '"Young Germany—Young Palestine': The Junges Deutschland Controversy of 1835," in Rose, Revolutionary Anti-Semitism in Germany, 171-184. 169 not Jewish the owners had demanded that their patrons obtain an entrance card which provided proof of their religious affiliation. In turn, the actions of the coffee-house had provoked violent reprisals from Jewish youths. Though Mundt did not specifically criticize the behaviour of the owners, he did note sarcastically that he supposed that it would henceforth be possible for him to sit all day long and rejoice in his Christianity while enjoying a cup of coffee.406 In closing Mundt wondered what Gabriel RieBer, whose battle for Jewish emancipation was well-known, would make of this situation.407 The more general issue of tolerance did not escape Mundt's attention. In the July 1835 issue of Literarischer Zodiacus he responded to an article from the Magazin fiir die Literatur des Auslandes in which a Professor Zeune from Berlin had remarked upon the frequency with which the word tolerance was heard in Prague. It was, according to the Professor, as common 4 0 6Mundt, "Feuilleton," 298-299. 4 0 7Gabriel RieBer (1806-1863) was aware of Mundt's comments and despatched a letter to him dated 12.11.1835, a letter which Mundt published in the December issue of the Zodiacus. RieBer observed that he was not, as Mundt had assumed, mortified by the situation, as anyone who fought for the rights of an oppressed class could not be offended by every individual aggravation. RieBer offered the following analogy by way of explanation: Denken Sie sich, es widerfuhre Ihnen im Leben irgend eine Unbill, die Sie nicht abwehren kbnnten, und ein Anwesender, Sie seinen Freund nennend, belegte diese Unbill mit dem schwersten Namen und setzte dann in behaglicher Ruhe hinzu, es kdnne die Ihnen angethane Krankung doch wohl schwer gebilligt werden!... Wurden Sie nicht dem vornehmen Freunde fur seine Freundschaft bestens danken und ihn bitten, sich um Sie und Ihre Krankungen fortan nicht zu bekummern? RieBer further added that he could not abide the fact that damage had been done to this shop-keeper by Jewish youths; Gabriel RieBer to Theodor Mundt (12.11.35), Literarischer Zodiacus (December 1835), 466. 170 as bread and butter. Mundt's response was that tolerance was indeed a very important part of the daily lives of the citizens of Prague and, moreover, the city's authorities were intelligent enough not to fear the significance of this word. However, in Berlin tolerance was largely misunderstood and its pursuit misguided.408 In this case, as in his exchange with Gabriel RieBer, a recurrent trait was evident in Mundt's attitude towards religious tolerance. Mundt displayed a frustrating unwillingness to go beyond a mere reporting of events and always seemed to avoid committing himself to any controversial stance. He reported such incidents in a resigned way, implying that it was not within his power to change people's attitudes. In the case of the anti-Semitic coffee-house he passed the matter off to Gabriel Riefier rather than challenge the owners himself. In fact he implied that the policy would not prevent him from patronizing that particular coffee-house. In this way, Gutzkow's repeated accusations that Mundt failed to take his social responsibilities seriously might once again be justified. In reviewing the second volume of Heine's Der Salon Mundt offered a detailed accounting of his own thoughts on religious change and the place of Christianity in the modern world. Once again Mundt ultimately positioned himself on the side of order. Mundt's review began with a description of Heine's approach to the study of religion, noting that Heine had taken on the twin towers of spiritualism and sensualism. Mundt focussed on Heine's belief that the most important goal of Christianity was the attainment of pure spirituality. Heine had argued that it was this which had made mankind so miserable and had given rise to much of the 4 0 8Theodor Mundt, "Feuilleton," Literarischer Zodiacus (July 1835), 92. 171 social unrest present in Europe. Heine had therefore concluded that the solution to many of these problems could be found in the rehabilitation of the flesh. In response to this claim Mundt noted that Heine's arguments rested upon "einen ganz materiellen Pantheismus, den man auch atheistisch nennen konnte, wenn es nicht fast unanstandig ware, in unserer gebildeten Zeit einem Gentleman noch den Vorwurf des Atheismus zu machen."410 Having established Heine's position, Mundt made very clear his own opposition to the doctrine of rehabilitation of the flesh, if it implied the complete extermination of Christianity as Heine intimated: Rehabilitation der Materie heifit allerdings das groBe Wort, welches zu losen und zu verarbeiten die heutige Menschheitsepoche vor alien berufen ist. Aber sind nicht gerade in der wahren Idee des Christenthums selbst die tiefsten und einzigen Elemente zur Versohnung dieser groBen eingerissenen Kluft zwischen Welt und Geist... gegeben?411 The nexus of Mundt's argument lay in his belief that the curse of the flesh was only a caricature of the true Christian ideal. For Mundt, Christianity had already abolished this curse when God revealed himself to the world in the flesh of Christ, at which point "Materie ist zur Statte des Geistes geheiligt worden." 4 1 2 Mundt's conclusion was that the reconciliation of spirit and flesh 4 0 9Theodor Mundt, "Der Salon von Heinrich Heine, zweiter Teil," Literarischer Zodiacus (April 1835), 320. ™Ibid, 321. *nIbid Ibid; for clarification of this point Mundt referred the reader to his novel Madonna, Unterhaltungen mit einer Heiligen, pages 386 through 397. This section, sub-titled Cur deus homo?, was a lengthy narrative on the relationship between matter and spirit, beginning with the expulsion of Adam and Eve from the Garden of Eden and concluding with the death of Christ. Here again Mundt emphasized that God sanctified equally the spirit and the flesh and both came together in every man, thus every man was Christ. There is some irony in this defence. The very passage which Mundt considered to be a defence against the sensualism of the Saint-Simonians was singled out by the Berlin censor as an attack on Christianity. Pages 172 lay in the positive revelation of Christianity itself. It did not require an entirely new doctrine, whether that be the pantheism of Heine or Saint-Simonianism, to complete this resurrection: Wir bediirfen keiner neuen Religion, weder vom H . Heine, noch vom St. Simon.... Diese Wiedereinsetzung der Materie, wenn sie sich anders iiber den blofi diabolischen Sinn neuromantischer Poeten hinauserheben soli zu einer wahren Idee, ist nur in und mit dem Christenthum zu vollbringen und liegt in demselben vorbedeutet.413 The influence of Hegelian philosophy is clearly evident in Mundt's critique of Heine. The reconciliation of the spirit and the flesh had already been achieved, but it had not penetrated the modern world. This position was most succinctly summarized by Hegel's pupil Eduard Grans (1797-1839) who also criticized the Saint-Simonian attempt to establish a new religion and argued instead that the task of the present age was not to discover a new religious principle but to complete the historical realization of the old. 4 1 4 In order to clarify further his disagreement with Heine on religious issues, Mundt featured a lengthy article by Alexander Jung in the August 1835 issue of the Literarischer Zodiacus. This article also introduced an unsettling element of anti-Semitism into the debate on Heine's motives. Jung argued that Heine's exile in Paris had imbued him with worldly qualities that detracted from his true German nature and, further, his Judaism prevented him from truly understanding Christian doctrine: Heine "kann gerade darin den Juden noch nicht 389 to 393 and pages 394 and 395 were specifically mentioned in the ban issued by the censor on April 30, 1835. See Appendix B(ii) and B(iii). 4 1 3Mundt, "Der Salon," 322. 4 1 4Gans paraphrased in Toews, Hegelianism, 229. Early in 1835 Gutzkow had ridiculed Gans for his rigid adherence to Hegel's system; Karl Gutzkow, "Gans und die Doktrinare," Phonix: Fruhlingszeitung fur Deutschland, Literaturblatt Nr. 6 (11.02.1835), 141-143. 173 verleugnen.... wir sehen in ihm den eingefleischtesten Juden, dem das Wort Christi: es lebet der Mensch nicht vom Brode allein, viel zu wenig verschlagsam erscheint, und der sich daher von Herzen nach den Fleischtopfen Aegyptens sehnt."415 Having thus placed Heine firmly among the anti-Christian sensualists, Jung concluded by restating the position taken by Mundt in his review of Der Salon. "Die Idee des Christenthums aber ist und bleibt ewig: die Einheit des Gottlichen und Menschlichen."416 The passages from Mundt's review of Der Salon represent the clearest expression of his religious beliefs and unquestionably set him apart from the Saint-Simonian camp. Mundt defended strenuously the notion that Christianity was an evolutionary process and that true Christian ideals still had much to offer the world. The problem for Mundt was that Christianity had been hijacked onto an entirely spiritualistic track. Thus, as with Wienbarg, it was possible to detect a latent attack on the denial of gratification and emphasis on pietism afflicting contemporary Christianity in Mundt's comments. More clearly than Wienbarg, however, Mundt was committed to the idea that Christianity could be resurrected through the historical actualization of the pre-existing reconciliation of spirit and matter. Mundt's spirited defence of Christianity in the face of what he perceived to be Heine's enthusiastic depiction of Saint-Simonianism makes it all the more difficult to interpret his intentions when he wrote the religious passages of his most important work, Madonna, Unterhaltungen mit einer Heiligen. Undoubtedly the author himself viewed the work as a 4 1 5Alexander Jung, "Ausstellungen fiber H . Heine," Literarischer Zodiacus (August 1835), 131-132. A16Ibid, 140. 174 defence of the true Christian values. It was for this reason that Mundt pointed to the work as a clarification of his views on Heine. E . M . Butler, however, labelled the book "the first and most complete expression which Mundt gave to his new philosophy of life [Saint-Simonianism]."417 While acknowledging that Mundt had openly rejected Saint-Simonianism, Butler nonetheless argued, "in spite of the fact that he had rejected Saint-Simonianism and accepted Christianity, he was more truly a Saint-Simonian than a Christian."4 1 8 Rather than attempt to determine the logic underlying this cryptic remark, it might be easier to reconsider the work in question in order to decipher its religious intent.419 Madonna combined a series of factual treatises on a variety of distinct subjects, including Catholicism, art, sculpture, music and Christianity, with a fictional encounter in a moonlit garden between the narrator and Maria, the Madonna of the book's title. Maria's life story is interwoven with the narrator's views on the topics which she raises. The narrator and Maria meet only once and the remainder of the book is constructed around a series of lengthy letters from the narrator to Maria and one letter from Maria to the narrator. This letter, entitled 'Bekenntnisse einer weltlichen Seele' tells Maria's life story and forms the basis for Mundt's 4 1 7Butler, The Saint-Simonian Religion, 352; in fairness to Butler the Berlin censor had objected to the book primarily because of its focus on the rehabilitation of the flesh, the central doctrine of the Saint-Simonians. However, the censor also emphasized the difference between the seriousness with which the Young Germans addressed this doctrine versus the naked materialism of French advocates of the rehabilitation of the flesh. See Appendix B(ii). 41*Ibid., 354-355. 4 1 9Despite the 'fictional' nature of the novel Mundt wrote that the religious passages in Madonna provided the best representation of his own views on religion. Mundt, "Der Salon von Heinrich Heine," 321. 175 analysis of modern society and religion. Born to a Catholic family who cared little for her well-being, Maria had been thoroughly indoctrinated into the Catholic faith. While still a young child she was sent to live with her hedonistic aunt where she was provided with an expensive education and luxurious clothes. Later, however, she would discover that these indulgences were being provided by a noble benefactor who wanted to make her his mistress. Though tempted by his attempted seduction, which Mundt described in graphic detail,4 2 1 Maria mustered the strength to resist his advances and fled to the safety of an old friend, Mellenberg. Mellenberg was a theological scholar who had secretly been giving Maria lessons in Protestantism. Realizing that they loved each other, Maria and Mellenberg consummated their relationship that night. Though Maria found the experience to be the answer to all of her problems, evidently the effect was less stimulating for Mellenberg since he committed suicide, unable to live with the guilt of his actions.422 Mellenberg's suicide forced Maria to flee Dresden for her father's home. There she believed that she would live in misery until his death. Theodor Mundt, Madonna: Unterhaltungen mit einer Heiligen (Leipzig: Reichenbach, 1835), 188-260. 4 2 1Mundt's graphic narrative prompted the Berlin censor to single out this section as evidence of an "obscene description of nightly sex acts"; Kdnigliche Ober-Censur Collegium, Wilken, von Lancizolle, "Theodor Mundt, Madonna, Unterhaltungen mit einer Heiligen," Berlin, April 30, 1835. See Appendix B(ii) for the complete text of the ruling. 4 2 2This was an interesting reversal of the usual suicide motif wherein it was nearly always the female character who, unable to face the consequences of her actions, committed suicide in desperation. This was certainly true in the case of Wally. 176 After Maria's autobiographical letter, the narrator reflected upon the various facets of her situation, in particular her feelings following her pleasurable encounter with her sexuality.423 The key issue once again concerned the relationship between spirit and matter. The narrator commented that he had been moved to reflect upon this question while viewing two paintings in an art gallery: Rembrandt's depiction of Christ before Pontius Pilate and Titian's Venus. The former painting caused a great deal of pain: Die welthistorische Bedeutung der Dummheit ist hier von Rembrand mit einer schneidenden Kalle und Ruhe des Pinsels ausgemalt. Der Knecht halt den Gott, damit der Gott nicht etwa entlaufe.... Dort hat die Dummheit dieser Welt den Gott gebunden, und hier wascht die Pflicht dieser Welt ihre Hande in Unschuld. Das ist der Gott verrathen, und jetzt gedenkt man daran, wie sein Reich nicht ist von dieser Welt. Aber durch Pflicht und Dummheit muB der menschgewordene Gott in den Tod stiirzen, derm er will das ganze Loos des Menschlichen theilen, weil er Fleisch geworden ist. Dadurch hat er dann wieder das Fleisch dieser Welt geheiligt.424 The narrator had thus reconstructed the salvation of man, but remained unable to comprehend the purpose for which man had been saved. Here Titian's Venus provided the answer: Schoner, lieblicher, zarter, weicher, geistig gehobener, poetisch duftiger, sah ich das Fleisch noch nie gemalt. Wie ein Gedicht lag der menschliche Korper vor meinen Augen da, ich seufzte, und andachtig und still wurden alle meine Geflihle. Ich habe groBe Ehrfurcht vor dem menschlichen Korper, denn die Seele ist darin! Und ich trachte nach der Einheit von Leib und Geist, darum bete ich auch an die Schonheit, und ein heiliger Anblick ist sie mir. Siehe, ich suchte nach Bildern derber Sinnlichkeit, und vor Titian's Venus wurde mir wieder heilig zu Muthe, und ein harmonischer Klang zog sich versohnend durch meine ganze Stimmung.425 4 2 3 Maria spoke once more at the end of the novel in a brief letter entitled "Madonna schreibt." At this point she revealed that she has finally found happiness by being baptized into the Protestant faith. ™Mundt, Madonna, 385-386. A25Ibid, 391-392. 177 Appreciating that Venus represented the unity of spirit and love, the narrator concluded that so too do all men. A l l men contain within themselves lightness and darkness; moreover, the two are integrally connected. Just as the spirit is nothing without the body, neither is the body anything without the spirit. The two are one, or as Mundt observed "[d]ie Trennung von Fleisch und Geist ist der unsiihnbare Selbstmord des menschlichen BewuBtseins."426 These passages represent perhaps the clearest evidence that the religious philosophy of Theodor Mundt, though heavily influenced by Hegel's philosophy, was also influenced by the epistemology of the early Romantic writers. Like the early Romantics, Mundt saw an Absolute, which he believed to be the Christian God, at the centre of the natural world. This Absolute was manifest in all of Its creations; It was neither real nor ideal, neither spirit nor matter, but rather the identity of both. Every creation thus contained both spirit and matter and to deny either one would be to deny one's fundamental nature. However, the influence of Hegelian philosophy convinced Mundt that Christianity itself contained the reconciliation of spirit and matter within its fundamental canons. Mundt's philosophy of religion was not enormously different in its inspiration from that of Wienbarg. Both argued in favour of the resurrection of the material world and both believed that the true teachings of Christianity were very different from the adulterated doctrines which were being taught in their time. However, Wienbarg's pantheism was so extreme it is doubtful that Christianity could evolve sufficiently to embrace the full scope of his philosophy. 426Ibid, 395. 178 3. The religious orientation of Karl Gutzkow is even more difficult to categorize and the substantial volume of work which he produced does little to clarify the issue. His religious upbringing was one of traditional pietism; his father had converted the family during Gutzkow's youth and Gutzkow himself was bound for a career in theology prior to switching to the study of philosophy.427 By 1832, however, Gutzkow had declared himself an enemy of pietism and regularly attacked the Fundamentalist pietists in the Literaturblatt for the Morgenblatt fur gebildete Stdnde, where he served as Wolfgang Menzel's assistant. Butler believed that it was Gutzkow's hatred for the pietist-dominated evangelical party which led him to publish his introduction to Friedrich Schleiermacher's preface to Lucinde429 Evidently the evangelical party was preparing to publish a collection of Schleiermacher's works which omitted the preface as a youthful indiscretion. Gutzkow, however, was determined that the public should know just how far removed Schleiermacher stood from the pietist cause. From the outset, Gutzkow's preface made it clear that Schleiermacher had commended Friedrich Schlegel's book precisely because it called for the reunification of the spirit and the flesh through love. The preface emphasized Schleiermacher's fundamental opposition to 4 2 7Gutzkow's father was born-again ('Wiedergeburt' in Gutzkow's words) after the suicide of Lorenz, a friend whose family shared the Gutzkow home. Gutzkow did not explain when this event took place but references in the text to Napoleon's exile on St. Helena would place the event in 1815 when Gutzkow was just four years old. Gutzkow described the events surrounding the conversion and the subsequent 'pietistic gloom' which descended on their household in his autobiographical Aus der Knabenzeit (Frankfurt am Main: Literarische Anstalt J. Rutten, 1852), GWIII, 211-470. 4 2 8Butler, The Saint-Simonian Religion, 291-292. 179 religious doctrines which would deny the passions of man: Der Aufruf ist der: Schamt Euch der Leidenschaft nicht und nehmt das Sittliche nicht wie eine Institution des Staates! Vor alien Dingen aber denkt uber die Methodik der Liebe nach und heiligt Euern Willen dadurch, daB Ihr ihn freimacht zur freien Ward! Der einzige Priester, der die Herzen traue, sey ein entzuckender Augenblick, nicht die Kirche mit ihrer Ceremonie und ihren gescheitelten Dienern! 4 2 9 Gutzkow's enthusiastic response to both Schleiermacher's preface and Schlegel's Lucinde, a book which did not receive positive reviews when it first appeared, would seem to indicate that he too advocated the type of individualistic pantheistic religious doctrines which Schleiermacher and others had developed. However, other writings seem to challenge this assumption. Prior to the publication of Wally430 Gutzkow published an interesting article in the Phonix literature supplement that provided additional insight into his religious orientation. The conclusions of this article place Gutzkow closer to the religious conclusions of Immanuel Kant 4 3 1 than to the full-blown pantheism of the romantic writers. The article, entitled "Judische Theologie," was an inquiry into the differences between traditional Judaism and the reformed Judaism of men such as 4 2 9Friedrich Schleiermacher, Schleiermachers Vertraute Briefe uber die ,Lucinde.' Mit einer Vorrede von Karl Gutzkow (Hamburg: Hoffmann und Campe, 1835), xxxv. 4 3 0 But after the manuscript's completion if one assumes that the printing process took approximately two months and Wally was published in mid-August. 431Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) argued in the Critique of Pure Reason (1781) that humans can know nothing of things as they are (noumena), but only things as they appear (phenomena). God was a noumen, thus the transcendental being that was worshipped as God was a mere invention of the human mind. However, in the Critique of Practical Reason (1785) Kant argued that practical reason dictated that God was necessary to provide people with ethical and moral guidance. 180 Moses Mendelssohn; it was inspired by the appearance of a new journal for the scientific investigation of Jewish theology. Gutzkow argued that rabbis from the old faith actually knew nothing of the basic tenets of their faith. Those teachings had been lost in the pedantic memorization and recitation of the innumerable statutes which composed the Talmud: Ein achter Rabbiner aus der alten Schule der Ceremonie kennt in seiner chaotischen Weisheit nichts von Grundlehren des Glaubens... nichts von Mendelsohn's Jerusalem, in der grollenden Erinnerung tausendjahriger Leiden Nichts von Emanzipation, Riesser und kriegerischen Gemalden. Das ist ihm Alles ffemd. Er ist fromm wie Enak und murmelt seinen Talmud. 4 3 3 Gutzkow argued that the nucleus of reformed Judaism was nothing more than a pure form of deism: Judaism stripped of its dogma. Thus he contended that the proponents of Mosaism, including Mendelssohn and Salomon Maimon, 4 3 4 could more easily accept and understand Kant's position since their faith was free of symbolic books and an insistence on a particular set of revealed truths.435 Moses Mendelssohn (1729-1786) stressed the moral and philosophical insights of Moses and the prophets rather than the religious tradition represented by the Talmud. He also rejected many of the rituals prescribed by the Talmud as being relics of an earlier and less mature form of Judaism. Mendelssohn was immortalized by Gotthold Lessing in his 1779 work Nathan der Weise. 4 3 3 Kar l Gutzkow, "Jiidische Theologie," Phonix: Fruhlingszeitung fur Deutschland, Literaturblatt Nr. 22 (5.6.1835), 525. 4 3 4Salomon Maimon also wrote under the name Salomon Ben Josua (1753-1800). He was a philosopher and rabbi who was a follower of Kant's philosophical writings. His 1797 work Kritische Untersuchungen iiber den menschlichen Geist was an investigation into the relationship between the spiritual realm and the world of matter. 4 3 5Gutzkow, "Jiidische Theologie," 526. 181 Gutzkow's personal religious beliefs were evident in the final passages of the article. He noted that there remained two threads of Judaism. As a religion of revelation Judaism was a rotten decayed vestige, the lowest and most contrary of all contemporary religions.436 However, as a religion of nature, Judaism had considerable promise: ...als Religion der Natur ist dies Judenthum ein Glaube, der VerheiBung hat. Der Messias, welcher im Judenthume als Offenbarungsreligion geweissagt ist, ist wahrlich erschienen! Der Messias aber, der im Judenthume als Naturreligion liegt, ist noch nicht da; aber der wird es sein, der uns eine Dreieinigkeit predigt: Gott, Freiheit und Unsterblichkeit.... bereitet euch vor, auf die groBe universelle Weltreligion, deren Taufe und Beschneidung im Handschlage liegen, deren Symbol also lauten wird: Thuet recht und scheuet Niemand! 4 3 7 Kant too had spoken of a natural religion 4 3 8 where Jesus would serve as the ideal example and religion would need no prophesy or miracles as evidence, nor would it be accompanied by any responsibilities other than moral ones. After reviewing Gutzkow's other writings, it becomes evident that Gutzkow remained a follower of Kant throughout his early literary career, not, as so many have argued, a Saint-Simonian or even a true adherent of Schleiermacher in the vein of Wienbarg. The interpretation of Judaism offered by Gutzkow in "Judische Theologie" appears to have motivated the characterization of the Jewess Delphine in Gutzkow's Wally, die Zweiflerin. Gutzkow characterized Delphine as having no knowledge of traditional Judaism. She was thus free from the anxieties which traditional religions aroused in people. "Ein "'Ibid, 527. 4 3 8The details of the natural religion, including its obviously Christian ethics, were laid down in Kant's 1793 work Die Religion innerhalb der Grenzen der blossen Vernunft. 182 gewisses unbestimmtes Dammern des Gefuhls muB fur sie schon hinreichend sein, die Nahe des Himmels zu spuren. Sie braucht jene Stufenleiter von positiven Lehren und historischen Tatsachen nicht, die die Christin erst erklimmen muB, um eine Einsicht in das Wesen der Religion zu bekommen."439 In Delphine Judaism became a natural religion whose adherents need no revealed truths to make them happy. With this characterization Gutzkow managed to attack both Christianity and traditional Judaism, while at the same time making clear that true freedom could be gained through a natural religion. Additional insight into Gutzkow's personal religious philosophy can be found in the essay "Wahrheit und Wirklichkeit." This essay appeared after the conclusion of Gutzkow's Wally: die Zweiflerin but it was first published in the Phonix literature supplement three weeks prior to the appearance of the controversial novel. 4 4 0 This article, as with much of Gutzkow's work, can be read on two levels. Initially, it seems that the essay was a reflection on the nature of literary production in his era. Gutzkow identified three types of literary reality, beginning with the most common and progressing through the more complex and valuable forms. According to Gutzkow the first type of literary production was the literature of reality— literature which faithfully devoted itself to reproducing reality as carefully as possible. This was the genre popularized by the novels of Walter Scott and Bulwer-Lytton, and the dramas of 4 3 9 Kar l Gutzkow, Wally, die Zweiflerin (Mannheim: C. Lowenthal, 1835), GWII, 272; Gutzkow's positive interpretation of Judaism contributed to the accusations levelled by Menzel and others that 'Young Germany' was a Jewish conspiracy against German literature and morals. See Rose, Revolutionary Antisemitism, 173. 4 4 0 Kar l Gutzkow, "Wahrheit u. Wirklichkeit," Phonix: Fruhlingszeitung fiir Deutschland, Literaturblatt Nr. 29 (25.7.1835), 693-695. 183 August Iffland and August von Kotzebue. 4 4 1 This was the literature which pleased the masses because it reproduced their comfortable world, their concerns (which Gutzkow labelled as petty) and their weaknesses. The literature of reality was the ultimate celebration of egotism.442 The second literary genre was termed the literature of plausibility. Here people who stood slightly above the intelligence of the masses found their satisfaction. Only the basic elements of reality were left intact by the writer; the rest was left to inference and imagination. This literature appealed to the avid reader who liked to consider himself capable of greater mental exertion than the masses. "Schwebend zwischen Himmel und Erde, ganz willenlos hingegeben den Capricen des Dichters, freuen sie sich zuletzt, dafj nun Alles, was sie gelesen haben, doch entweder nicht wahr ist, oder im entgegengesetzten Falle immer sehr wahrscheinlich bleibe."4 4 3 Gutzkow's third literary genre was the literature of poetic truth. This was creative even revolutionary literature which was capable of building entirely new realities. The literature of poetic truth broke free of all of the traditional restraints of the state, the family, religion, social mores, and assumptions. "Die poetische Wahrheit offenbart sich nur dem Genius. Dieser lauscht niedergestreckt auf den Boden der Wirklichkeit, und hort wie in den innersten Getrieben der Gemiither eine embryonische Welt mit keimendem BewuGtsein wachst."444 ^Bulwer-Lytton (1803-1873), English novelist; August Iffland (1759-1814), actor and dramatist; August von Kotzebue (1761-1819), German dramatist and opponent of the liberal ideals of the Burschenschaften. 4 4 2Gutzkow, "Wahrheit und Wirklichkeit," 693-694. 443Ibid, 694. 444Ibid. 184 Gutzkow's essay concluded with a call for those geniuses who were capable of recognizing and creating poetic truth to go further than they had previously dared in challenging the institutions of reality: law, constitutions, states and customs.445 "Wahrheit und Wirklichkeit" could thus be read as a simple continuation of Gutzkow's earlier appeals to Germany's great young writers to take up their role of constructing a new socio-political reality. At another level, however, Gutzkow's essay perfectly captured the Kantian philosophy and applied it to the existing situation in Germany: ...doch wurde Niemand zu behaupten wagen, daB Alles, was geschieht, Alles, was wir als geschehen beobachten kdnnen, etwas Andres sei, als die zufalligen AuBerlichkeiten jener offenbarten Gottesidee. Ich glaube, daB Alles gut ist, was geschieht; glaube aber nicht, daB eben nur das geschehen kann, was geschieht. Unendlich ist das Reich der Moglichkeit, jenes Schattenreich, das hinter den am Lichte der Begebenheiten sichtbaren Erscheinungen liegt. Es gibt eine Welt, die wenn sie auch nur in unsern Traumen lebte, sich ebenso zusammensetzen konnte zur Wirklichkeit, wie die Wirklichkeit selbst, eine Welt, die wir durch Phantasie und Vertrauen zu combiniren vermogen. Schaale Gemuther wissen nur das, was geschieht; Begabte ahnen, was sein konnte; Freie bauen sich ihre eigne Welt. 4 4 6 Here Gutzkow restated the essence of the Kantian philosophy; everything that man perceived was just that, an external perception of an unknowable universal truth. By supreme effort, however, man could construct his world from the appearance of things, mindful, however, of the fact that this universal truth was itself invisible and never lay in what was real. 4 4 7 That Gutzkow felt it necessary to append this article to Wally might also provide some Tbid, 695. Tbid, 693. 7Ibid, 694. 185 insight into the true intent of the religious themes of the novel. Gutzkow's essay concluded with the observation that German and French literature were slowly evolving towards the literature of poetic truth. In German literature this was evident in the imaginative female characters which graced the new literature and in the original situations and social mores which seemed to contradict all traditional assumptions. Gutzkow saw this as an occurrence rich in significance for the future development of Germany and considered himself at the forefront of this development.449 Given these assumptions on Gutzkow's part, Wally can be read as an attempt to construct a new reality through poetic truth, a reality which was as plausible as any other. The novel was not per se an attack on Christianity as much as it was an alternate interpretation of the external appearance of religion. The question which remains, however, is whether or not the text of the novel bears out this hypothesis and, in the process, confirms the preliminary assessment that Gutzkow was in fact a follower of Kant. In the 1874 edition of Wally, Gutzkow changed the title of this section from "Wahrheit und Wirklichkeit" to "Wahrheit und Wirklichkeit: Eine Erklarung" thus indicating that his intent in appending the essay was to have it explain the novel's purpose. Paul Rose argues that the real focus of Wally is the Jewish Question; Rose, Revolutionary Anti-Semitism, 185. This study does not accept this assessment due to the fact that the Jewish character Delphine does not appear until the third part of the novel by which time Wally's own religious doubts were well-established. Moreover, Gutzkow's novel ridicules traditional Christianity and traditional Judaism equally in the novel. At this point there is no indication that Gutzkow is capable of the kind of sophisticated analysis of the Jewish Question which Rose attributes to him. Gutzkow himself remarked in 1838 that though the Jewish Question had weighed heavily on his mind after his discovery that Ludwig Borne was a Jew, a fact which he initially branded 'unfortunate,' he was unable to come to terms with this issue until 1838. Gutzkow quoted in Heinrich Houben, Jungdeutscher Sturm und Drang: Ergebnisse und Studien (Leipzig: Brockhaus, 1911; Hildesheim: Georg Olms, 1974), 101. 4 4 9Gutzkow, "Wahrheit und Wirklichkeit," 694. 186 Religious tensions are central to the narrative in Gutzkow's Wally. It was religious doubt which provoked Wally's personal crisis, this in turn encouraged her experiments with sensualism and immorality, and finally, it was her religious doubt which was responsible for her suicide. The catalyst of Wally's crisis was the character of Casar, who could be safely termed an atheist. As sketched by Gutzkow, Casar disliked all forms of religion for they were all "das Produkt der Verzweiflung: wie kann sie die Verzweiflung heilen?"450 However, he was reminded that genuine religion, in this instance synonymous with natural religion, could provide positive benefits to society: Echte Religion ist positive Heilkraft; aber gleicht das Christentum nicht einer Latwerge, die aus hundert Ingredienzien zusammengekocht ist? Meine Vernunft sagt mir, auch ohne Hahnemanns "Organon", dafi die Krankheiten immer einfache und nur die Symptome zusammengesetzt sind, dafi die Natur fur jede ihrer Abnormitaten eine medizinische Rektifikation im simpeln Zustande hat, und dafi in einer Mixtur von Heilkraften eine Kraft die andere aufhebt. Die unerhdrte Uberladenheit des Christentums aus traditionellen, historischen und biblischen Ursachen macht aber, dafi es fur den Schmerz der Seele ganz ohne Wirkung ist. Eines seiner Dogmen stdrt das andre.451 Already then, there were signs that Gutzkow was suggesting a simpler religion, free of conflicting sources, much as Kant had advocated in his Die Religion innerhalb der Grenzen der blossen Vernunft. It was exposure to such ideas, however, which provoked Wally's own spiritual crisis—a crisis which revolved around the essence of God. Wally could not understand why God would create mankind but not grant them the ability to grasp His essence. If it was 4 5 0Gutzkow, Wally, die Zweiflerin, GWII, 223. 451Ibid. Samuel Hahnemann (1755-1843) was considered to be one of the founders of homeopathic medicine. His major work Organon der rationellen Heilkunde was published in 1810. 187 impossible to know anything of God, why then should she believe in Him? Wally concluded, "[o]der es darf mich niemand tadeln, wenn ich denke, die Existenz Gottes anzunehmen, war eine ganz aufierliche, politische und polizeiliche Ubereinkunft der Volker." 4 5 2 In these reflections, Wally expressed the essence of the Kantian dilemma; one could never know the essence of God because mankind was not endowed with the power to do this. God, the noumen, would remain forever unknowable. In her quest to answer her doubts regarding the essence of God Wally acquired a copy of Lessing's edited collection of Reimarus' Wolfenbuttel Fragments. "Die Fragmente nehmen meine ganze Aufmerksamkeit in Anspruch. Ihr niichterner, leidenschaftsloser Ton erschreckt das Gewissen nicht... Wie der Autor die Bibel zerfleischt, wie er in den glattgescheitelten Mienen jener Fischer und Zollner, welche das Christentum predigten, den Schalk entdeckt, denselben Schalk, den der gottselige Pietismus so oft im Nacken fuhrt!"453 The fragments alone, however, were incapable of resolving Wally's doubts for she believed that they did not penetrate the inner nature of Christ's teachings but rather preoccupied themselves only with the historical revelation of those teachings.454 Increasingly tormented by her religious skepticism, Wally turned to another confession of religious faith, a document which was included in its entirety in her diary: "Gestandnisse uber Religion und Christentum." This was the document which the Mannheim tribunal accused Gutzkow of using in order to advance his own religious 452Ibid, 276. ™Ibid., 277-278. ***Ibid, 278. 188 beliefs. He, however, denied this charge, arguing instead that he had simply wanted to sketch the logical culmination of Casar's personal philosophy which was incapable of grasping Christianity as an evolving historical phenomenon.455 In Gutzkow's defence, "Gestandnisse" does not coincide with his previously expressed religious beliefs. Instead it stands as an absolute negation of all aspects of Christianity: Religion ist Verzweiflung am Weltzweck. Wiifjte die Menschheit, wohin ihre Leiden und Freuden tendieren, wuBte sie ein sichtbares Ziel ihrer Anstrengungen, einen Erklarungsgrund fur dies wirre Durcheinander der Interessen, fur die Tapezierung des Firmaments, fur die wechselnde Natur... sie wurde an keinen Gott glauben. In progressiver Entwicklung folgt hieraus dreierlei: Der natiirliche Ursprung der Religion, die Akkomodation der gottlichen Begriffe an den jedesmaligen Bildungsgrad und zuletzt die Unmoglichkeit historischer Religionen bei steigender Aufklarung.4 5 6 Revelation, the Gospels, the life of Jesus, the development of the Church, Luther, and the Reformation, were all attacked as misleading and deceptive devices by which the people of the Christian world had been controlled. However, not content with assailing religion, the tract also tackled the issue of philosophy, arguing that it had entirely failed to do any damage to the institution of Christianity. The deists had been too frivolous and witty to do any serious damage to Christianity. "Die naive Einfachheit kindlicher und glaubensffeudiger Seelen pariert alle Nadelstiche Voltaires, eines Mannes, den man fur einen Schneider halten mochte, so furchtsam und eitel war er." 4 5 7 Likewise Kant, Schelling, Schleiermacher and Hegel were all Testimony from the Mannheim tribunal quoted in Richard Fester, Eine vergessene Geschichtsphilosophie. Zur Philosophie des jungen Deutschlands (Hamburg: Verlagsanstalt und Druckerei A - G , 1890), 32. 4 5 6Gutzkow, Wally, die Zweiflerin, GWII, 288. 4 5 1 Ibid, 300. 189 pilloried for their unwillingness to tackle the Christian behemoth explicitly: Auf der Kanzel gaben sie niemals jenen Glauben preis, den sie auf dem Katheder anatomisch zergliederten. Uberall trifft man auf Diakone und Konsistorialrate dieser Art, welche sich wie jesuitische Aale theoretisch winden und hin und her strauben, praktisch aber sich immer wieder in ihren homiletischen Schleim verstecken 4 5 8 Finally, both Saint-Simon and Lamennais were dismissed as mere symptoms of their turbulent age rather than a genuine cure. 4 5 9 It remains somewhat puzzling, notwithstanding Gutzkow's protestations at the Mannheim trial, why he would include such a provocative and inflammatory tract in his novel if he remained a confirmed Kantian at heart. In order to resolve this dilemma one needs to focus upon two issues: the nature of the criticism of Kant and the Deists, and the consequences of this intense statement of religious denial. In critiquing Kant and the other philosophers of religion, the tract did not object to the content of their philosophy but rather to their hypocritical unwillingness to take that philosophy to its logical conclusion: the destruction of Christianity and the liberation of a new vision of creation.460 Furthermore, lost in the Mannheim tribunal's attempt to indict Gutzkow for every word in the tract, was the realization that Gutzkow himself had undermined the allure of such an atheistic philosophy by revealing Wally's fate. Far from being liberated by her realization that Christianity was a fraud, Wally was destroyed by it: Noch sechs Monate hielt Wally ein Leben aus, dessen Stiitze weggenommen ™Ibid, 301-302. i59Ibid, 304. A60Ibid. 190 war. Sie, die Zweiflerin, die Ungewisse, die feindin Gottes, war sie nicht frommer als die, welche sich mit einem nichtverstandenen Glauben beruhigen? Sie hatte die tiefe Uberzeugung in sich, daB ohne Religion das Leben des Menschen elend ist. Sie ging nun damit um, dem ihrigen ein Ende zu machen.461 The novel closed with Wally's suicide. The alternate reality that Gutzkow had constructed thus ended in tragedy, leaving the reader to conclude that the abject denial of Christianity could only bring disaster. Unlike Mundt's Madonna which provided the reader with a positive ending and could thus be read as a ringing endorsement of sensualism, Wally's fate would hardly be inclined to attract a legion of followers. Though the novel held Christianity, or at least the conflict between Christianity and sensualism, responsible for Wally's fate, it also intimated that a natural religion could function as a positive, healing force. 4 6 2 Unfortunately Wally was never exposed to such a doctrine; instead she experienced only a soul-destroying form of atheism. In this interpretation, the religious overtones of Wally, die Zweiflerin were entirely consistent with Gutzkow's personal advocacy of a natural religion. The religious overtones of the novel also stood in opposition to the beliefs of Ludolf Wienbarg and Theodor Mundt, both of whom endorsed sensualism and challenged the Christian ethical code. 4. Turning finally to the work of Heinrich Laube, one finds here perhaps the most radical writings, on the topic of religion of any of the Young Germans. Like Karl Gutzkow, Laube had been bound for a theological career when he entered university, first at Halle and later at ^Ibid, 305. ^Ibid, 223. 191 Breslau. As indicated previously, Laube's years at Halle were significant for two reasons. First, it was during this time that Laube became involved in the liberal politics of the Burschenschaften, an involvement which would contribute to his eventual clash with the authorities.463 Second, Halle was a hotbed of religious activity, as an intense theological debate was being waged between the Halle Pietists and Protestant Rationalists over the true nature of Christ. The theological conflict at Halle left Laube increasingly disillusioned with contemporary Christianity and instead he began to demonstrate an increasing interest in the doctrines of the Saint-Simonians. Unlike the majority of analysts who had focussed on the philosophy and politics of the Saint-Simonians, Laube admitted to a deep-seated interest in their theology. He argued that the Saint-Simonians were pursuing an entirely new direction though this path was rooted in the pantheism and materialism of the past and could also trace its roots to the work of many German philosophers. Despite the fact that the audacity of the Saint-Simonians sometimes concealed their historical genius, Laube believed that it was time that this genius be recognized.464 For Laube, whose membership in the Burschenschaften had heightened his interest in liberal ideals, Saint-Simonianism seemed to represent a new and appealing manifestation of the Unlike the other Young Germans who evaded persecution until the end of 1835, Laube was arrested in Berlin on July 26, 1834 after a decree of banishment had forced him to flee Leipzig in May of that year. 4 6 4Heinrich Laube, "Feuilleton," Blatter fur literarische Unterhaltung, (29.4.1832), 4. 192 spirit of freedom. Reflecting back on his awareness of the Saint-Simonians, Laube recalled that the news of the Saint-Simonians in Paris awoke in him once more thoughts of freedom. "Sie sprachen von einer ganz neuen Organisation des Begriffes von Freiheit, sie verbreiteten ihn auf alle Theile der Gesellschaft, auf Familie, Kirche, auf den ganzen Staat.... Es war der Beginn des Socialismus in ausgedehntestem Sinn." 4 6 6 In June 1832 Laube applauded the Saint-Simonian vision of a religion that would be a warmer and more beautiful Christianity which did not dwell in dungeons.467 Unlike the other Young Germans who remained either silent on or openly hostile towards the Saint-Simonians, Laube continued to display a generally supportive attitude until the latter part of 1833. Early in 1832 he indicated to his publisher Heinrich Brockhaus that he was planning to write an account of Saint-Simonianism. Brockhaus, however, rejected the proposed manuscript and Laube did not pursue the issue.468 Nonetheless, Laube continued to follow the activities of the Saint-Simonians, planning a trip to Paris to meet with the men of the Salle-Taitbout. Ill-health, passport difficulties, and fear of a renewed outbreak of cholera would combine first to forestall and ultimately to prevent Laube's trip, but throughout 1833 he continued to give notice of the activities of the Saint-Simonians in the Zeitung fur die elegante 4 6 5Laube reflected upon these influences in his autobiographical Erinnerungen (1869-1875) and Nachtrdge (1883), indicating in both sources that it was liberalism which provoked his decision to leave the Church and which stimulated his interest in the doctrines of Saint-Simon. 4 6 6Heinrich Laube, Nachtrdge (Leipzig: M . Hesse, 1883), 284. 4 6 7Heinrich Laube, "Feuilleton," Blatterfiir literarische Unterhaltung (26.6.1832), 3. 4 6 8Heinrich Laube to Heinrich Brockhaus; 4.3.1832. Cited in Butler, The Saint-Simonian Religion, 180. 193 Welt. In October 1833, Laube wrote that the doctrines of Saint-Simon represented "die wichtigste Speculation der neueren Zeit." It is difficult to determine whether or not Laube was in fact a Saint-Simonian because he seldom wrote on purely religious matters. However, several articles from the Zeitung fiir die elegante Welt from the year 1833 outline the essence of Laube's religious beliefs. On January 4, 1833 Laube used his literature column to assess the purpose of literature in general and criticism in particular. Emphasizing the democratic nature of the new literature, Laube announced that socio-political change could be effected through literary production. In the case of theology, however, he believed that the theologians of the day were incapable of effecting the necessary changes to Christianity: Wie eine trostlose Matrone, der die alten Wochenschriften zur Lecture ausbleiben, welche des Sonntags mit Entsetzen Gerausch auf den StraGen hort, bei der man anzufragen wagt, ob ihr Quartier zu vermiethan sey — sitzt die alte Theologie da. — Als sie die bekannte Liaison mit dem Rationalismus einging, erwartete man, sie werde sich noch einmal verjiingen. Umsonst; jene Helden Wegscheider, Paulus, Schuderoff, Rohr haben auch weiter nichts gethan oder gewagt, als ein blank geputztes Schwert aus der Scheide zu ziehen, in der Luft damit herurnzufahren und ihre Zuschauer mit dem Blinken und Blitzen zu erfreuen, sie zeigten die Waffe, womit zu helfen ware, ohne sie zu gebrauchen. Sie erklarten mit niichternen Worten ein altes Christenthum, aber waren zu muthlos oder zu arm, es zu verjiingen.470 The German Saint-Simonians, according to Laube, had begun to effect the necessary changes but had been unable or unwilling to go far enough. Karl Gottlieb Bretschneider471 alone had 4 6 9Heinrich Laube, "Literatur," Zeitung fur die elegante Welt, Nr. 198 (10.10.1833), 792. 4 7 0Heinrich Laube, "Literatur," Zeitung fur die elegante Welt, Nr. 3 (4.1.1833), 10-11. 4 7 1 K a r l Gottlieb Bretschneider (1776-1848) published the treatise Der Simonismus und 194 distinguished himself from the majority by according Saint-Simonianism its due consideration,472 but a much greater effort would be required in order to effect the necessary degree of religious change. Laube went on to argue that the essential problem with contemporary Christianity was that over the years it had lost sight of the original meaning of the word of God due to layers of man-made tradition.473 Laube believed that the original word of God had been irreparably damaged because subsequent generations had anointed not just the word of God, but also the body which had spoken that word. Subsequently each generation had added new ornaments to the body until it had turned into a frightful figure which bore no resemblance to the original word. When finally a new generation had rediscovered the essence of Christian doctrine which, according to Laube, was universal love for all mankind, the relic of Christianity tried to defend itself. "Und als eine junge Zeit plotzlich das herrliche Wort wieder auffand in den Ritzen der Erde, das Wort der allgemeinen Menschenliebe, da schrien die Mumienwarter: 'Wehe der Rotte Korah! '" 4 7 4 The only solution to this problem would lie in the complete renewal of theology: Die Theologie befiedert sich neu, wie die Vogel thun miissen zur Aequinoctialzeit, sie sind krank dabei, sie mochten den neuen Federn gern entrinnen — aber wer entrinnt dem Gesetze der Weltordnung; durch dicke Bande werden auch unsere Huter des Himmels laufen, ehe sie's glauben werden, da!3 sie nicht wissen, wo der Himmel ist, und dafj so viel Wege dahin fuhren, als Wege gehen aus menschlichem Geist und Herzen — aber mit Entsetzen werden sie an einem schonen Morgen die alten schwarzen Rocke das Christenthum (1832). 4 7 2Laube, "Literatur," Nr. 3 (4.1.1833), 11. 195 abgefallen, ein neues buntes Gefieder gewachsen sehen. Comments made in late 1833 indicated that Laube believed Saint-Simonianism could never effect so complete a renewal. Laube questioned the hierarchical structure which Enfantin was building and he clearly harboured doubts about the way in which Enfantin had introduced the public to the doctrines of Saint-Simon, in particular the idea of emancipation of the flesh. Laube noted that Enfantin had deterred many possible sympathizers with an ill-timed demonstration of the emancipation of the flesh. Enfantin had evidently placed a woman in an easy chair in the 'church' on the Rue Taitbout and instructed her to remove all of her clothes in full view of the assembled crowd. Laube's conclusion was that the only thing Enfantin had accomplished was to generate near-universal support for the municipal police when they raided and cleared out the room. 4 7 6 It was thus apparent that Laube's infatuation with the Saint-Simonianism of Enfantin was waning by the end of 1833. Laube's evolving religious beliefs were evident in several of the major literary projects which he undertook during the years 1833 and 1834, prior to the ban against Young Germany. Das neue Jahrhundert was planned as a trilogy; however, only two volumes entitled Polen and Politische Briefe were published. The third volume was to have been an account of the Saint-Simonians. Laube commented in the preface to Polen that "[i]ch denke, im Anfange des III. Bandes einige vergniigliche Unterredungen uber das aussere Leben und Treiben der Simonisten ankniipfen zu konnen, wenn sich nicht alle gute Christen von meinem ersten Capitel, und 'Laube, Nachtrage, 292. 196 meinen lieben Simonisten, abgewendet haben." Brockhaus' objections prevented the completion of this volume but Laube turned his attention to a new trilogy Das junge Europa. Butler believed that the first volume of this series, Die Poeten, was an attempt to create and evaluate a Saint-Simonian society in action.4 7 8 Whether this was in fact Laube's intent will never be known as neither of his autobiographical works discuss the Saint-Simonian elements of Die Poeten. However, as mentioned above, Laube indicated that Das junge Europa was an expression of his own religious philosophy, a philosophy which was very similar to that which had been advocated in Heine's Der Salon.479 Die Poeten was to be the first of three novels which explored the most important facets of the new Europe. Only the first volume was completed before Laube's 1834 imprisonment. Die Poeten was an exploration of the lives of six men and seven women who together represented a broad cross-section of German youth. Three of these characters were most important in so far as the religious message of the novel was concerned: Valerius, an ardent liberal in politics and in his love affairs, whose stated purpose was to liberate love from the shackles of convention; William, a pietist Christian and strict moralist; and Constantin, a disillusioned nobleman whose failed liaisons had led him to flee to Paris to find inspiration in the ideals of the revolution of 1830. The dialogues among these three men, written in the form 4 7 7Heinrich Laube, Polen (Leipzig: Furth, 1833), xiv. 4 7 8Butler, The Saint-Simonian Religion, 203-218. 4 7 9 In reviewing the second volume of Heine's Der Salon Laube indicated that he had advocated a pantheistic philosophy similar to Heine's own beliefs in Die Poeten. Heinrich Laube, "Der Salon, von H . Heine. Erster Band. Hamburg, bei Hoffmann u. Campe. 1834," Zeitung fur die elegante Welt, Nr. 248 (19.12.1833), 991. 197 of a series of letters, allowed Laube to undermine the pietist position while applauding the religious tolerance of Valerius. It was William who initiated the discussion of religious matters with the following comment: "[m]eine Religion ist die unzertrennbare Einigung mit dem Hochsten, sie besteht wie die Atmosphare, auch wenn ich selbst unfahig bin, die geistigen Anknupfungspunkte fest zu halten."480 William's confession of faith inspired the first diatribe on religious matters from Valerius who argued that the faith advocated by William was exclusionary. Even so, he valued religious tolerance so highly that he could never censure someone for holding such a view. He did, however, resent William's accusation that Valerius' faith was despotic, when his own words rang of religious despotism.481 In the second half of the novel, the debate between William and Valerius was renewed, occasioned by a letter from Constantin in which he remarked on his new-found realizations about Christianity. This letter stands as a virtual paraphrase of the argument which Laube had expressed in January 1833 in the Zeitung fur die elegante Welt. ...was Christus gebracht und durch seinen Tod besiegelt hat, ist durch die Handwerker entstellt worden. Sein Opfer, wodurch er einen unschatzbaren Schatz von Wahrheiten beglaubigt und der Welt aus Herz gelegt hat, dieses Opfer ist zu einer erdriickenden Kreuz- und Wundertheorie verdreht worden. Man muB sich schamen, wenn man einen Zeisig lustig zwitschern hort — die ganze Erde ist durch die schwarzbliitigen Leute zu einem Sarge eingesegnet worden; Sonne, Mond und Sterne sind Todtenfackeln, der Himmel ist ein groBes schwarzes Leichentuch, die Menschen sind lauter Todte oder Todesreife und tragen alle Leid. Es schickt sich nicht zu lachen, wenn man an Gott de