Nestroys Komödie: 'Der Talisman'. Von der ersten Notiz zum vollendeten Werk. Mit bisherunveröffentlichten Handschriften by Helmut HerlesReview by: W. E. YatesThe Modern Language Review, Vol. 71, No. 1 (Jan., 1976), pp. 224-226Published by: Modern Humanities Research AssociationStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3724476 .

Accessed: 28/06/2014 08:41

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

Modern Humanities Research Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend accessto The Modern Language Review.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 185.31.194.117 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 08:41:30 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Though Professor Mautner takes other critics to task for neglecting the political and social background in the years after I848 (this is surely because in outlook Nestroy was, as Professor Mautner says, essentially a 'Vormarz-Liberaler'), his own concern is not principally with the historical background. Nor is it with theatre history, though in both fields he has some interesting points to make - for example, on the realism of Lumpazivagabundus and of Nestroy's performance as Knieriem, and the probable association between the luxuriant growth of wordplay in the later plays and the expectations of the theatre public of the I84os and i850s. In questions of theatrical history, and of Nestroy's sources, he tends to lean heavily on Rommel's apparatus in the fifteen-volume Sdmtliche Werke; and it is indeed in this area that his points most often seem unsatisfactory. He argues, for example, that the trades of Nestroy's figures function in the main merely as a social placing of recurrent types (as opposed to a means of articulating standards of outlook that belonged essentially to theatrical tradition); he suggests that an antecedent of Titus Feuerfuchs may be seen in Bims; he refers misleadingly to Karl Carl as having 'closed' the Theater an der Wien in I845; and he neglects the musical component in Nestroy's work. The most controversial feature of the book, however, is the repeated interpretation of the monologues and Couplets of the central figures as vehicles for the dramatist's self- expression. A series of characters are taken as speaking for Nestroy: Leicht ('Leicht wird Nestroy'), Lorenz ('Lorenz-Nestroy'), Willibald, even Konrad in Theater- g'schichten, a role played by Carl Treumann. Nestroy's reputation as a cynic, Mautner observes, has resulted from his identification with such figures as Nebel: but is this any more arbitrary than a definition of Nestroy's outlook as 'herzensgut'? Professor Mautner supports this definition with an allusion to Nestroy's character in private life - a correlation that runs counter to all the disparities between (tongue-tied) private character and (aggressively fluent) theatrical role.

Professor Mautner's view of the role of the central comic figure is summarized in a characteristically lucid paragraph on page 51. Whatever one's disagreements in detail of interpretation, his book is a major landmark in Nestroy studies. Hardly a page will fail to stimulate both the specialist and the non-specialist; and in particular the opening 'essay' is by far the best general introduction now available to the textual (as opposed to theatrical or historical) qualities of Nestroy's work.

EXETER W. E. YATES

Nestroys Komidie: 'Der Talisman'. Von der ersten Notiz zum vollendeten Werk. Mit bisher unveriiffentlichten Handschriften. By HELMUT HERLES. Miinchen: Fink. 1974. 280 pp. DM 36.

Helmut Herles is the author of a Frankfurt thesis on Der Talisman and an excellent edition in the Komedia series. His extended study of the relation of the comedy to its French source (Bonaventure by Dupeuty and de Courcy) is a major contribution to Nestroy scholarship, a very full treatment of the genesis and text of Nestroy's greatest play which must surely stimulate similar treatment of other works. That a large number of misprints have been allowed to pass uncorrected is doubly regrettable in a study presenting new textual evidence, where reliability of printing is essential.

Herles follows the development of Nestroy's text from his first sketch onwards. Three hitherto unpublished manuscripts in the collection of the Stadtbibliothek in Vienna provide detailed evidence: the first outline, based closely on the source; the scenario with additional notes and drafts, which prove 'die Nachbarschaft von systematischer handwerklicher Planung und launischer Spontaneitat'; and a com- plete draft of the Quodlibet in Act II. After presenting this material Herles proceeds

Though Professor Mautner takes other critics to task for neglecting the political and social background in the years after I848 (this is surely because in outlook Nestroy was, as Professor Mautner says, essentially a 'Vormarz-Liberaler'), his own concern is not principally with the historical background. Nor is it with theatre history, though in both fields he has some interesting points to make - for example, on the realism of Lumpazivagabundus and of Nestroy's performance as Knieriem, and the probable association between the luxuriant growth of wordplay in the later plays and the expectations of the theatre public of the I84os and i850s. In questions of theatrical history, and of Nestroy's sources, he tends to lean heavily on Rommel's apparatus in the fifteen-volume Sdmtliche Werke; and it is indeed in this area that his points most often seem unsatisfactory. He argues, for example, that the trades of Nestroy's figures function in the main merely as a social placing of recurrent types (as opposed to a means of articulating standards of outlook that belonged essentially to theatrical tradition); he suggests that an antecedent of Titus Feuerfuchs may be seen in Bims; he refers misleadingly to Karl Carl as having 'closed' the Theater an der Wien in I845; and he neglects the musical component in Nestroy's work. The most controversial feature of the book, however, is the repeated interpretation of the monologues and Couplets of the central figures as vehicles for the dramatist's self- expression. A series of characters are taken as speaking for Nestroy: Leicht ('Leicht wird Nestroy'), Lorenz ('Lorenz-Nestroy'), Willibald, even Konrad in Theater- g'schichten, a role played by Carl Treumann. Nestroy's reputation as a cynic, Mautner observes, has resulted from his identification with such figures as Nebel: but is this any more arbitrary than a definition of Nestroy's outlook as 'herzensgut'? Professor Mautner supports this definition with an allusion to Nestroy's character in private life - a correlation that runs counter to all the disparities between (tongue-tied) private character and (aggressively fluent) theatrical role.

Professor Mautner's view of the role of the central comic figure is summarized in a characteristically lucid paragraph on page 51. Whatever one's disagreements in detail of interpretation, his book is a major landmark in Nestroy studies. Hardly a page will fail to stimulate both the specialist and the non-specialist; and in particular the opening 'essay' is by far the best general introduction now available to the textual (as opposed to theatrical or historical) qualities of Nestroy's work.

EXETER W. E. YATES

Nestroys Komidie: 'Der Talisman'. Von der ersten Notiz zum vollendeten Werk. Mit bisher unveriiffentlichten Handschriften. By HELMUT HERLES. Miinchen: Fink. 1974. 280 pp. DM 36.

Helmut Herles is the author of a Frankfurt thesis on Der Talisman and an excellent edition in the Komedia series. His extended study of the relation of the comedy to its French source (Bonaventure by Dupeuty and de Courcy) is a major contribution to Nestroy scholarship, a very full treatment of the genesis and text of Nestroy's greatest play which must surely stimulate similar treatment of other works. That a large number of misprints have been allowed to pass uncorrected is doubly regrettable in a study presenting new textual evidence, where reliability of printing is essential.

Herles follows the development of Nestroy's text from his first sketch onwards. Three hitherto unpublished manuscripts in the collection of the Stadtbibliothek in Vienna provide detailed evidence: the first outline, based closely on the source; the scenario with additional notes and drafts, which prove 'die Nachbarschaft von systematischer handwerklicher Planung und launischer Spontaneitat'; and a com- plete draft of the Quodlibet in Act II. After presenting this material Herles proceeds

Reviews Reviews 224 224

This content downloaded from 185.31.194.117 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 08:41:30 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

first to an interpretation of various completed scenes, concentrating on the tech- nique of construction by comparison with Bonaventure, then to a comparison between Der Talisman and the extant fragments of a rival version by Josef Kupelwieser, and concludes by giving the text of Bonaventure with a translation into German.

His detailed examination of the drafts not only confirms 'daB Nestroy ... nach vielfiltiger und vieldeutiger Sprache systematisch suchte'; he also seeks to show 'daB bei der sprachlichen Arbeit am Talisman entscheidende Impulse aus der Insze- nierung im Szenarium stammen'. The resulting product is not 'reine Sprachartistik', but a language that is theatrical in its genesis as well as in its effect. The point is well made that future critics must go further than Siegfried Brill (Die Komidie der Sprache, 1967: see MLR, 64 (1969), 947-9) in admitting 'die Genesis der Nestroyschen Sprache aus dem inszenierenden Spiel'; but while Herles shows that even in the first sketch Nestroy's technique includes 'die stiindige Heranziehung des stilisierten Dialektes', he himself stresses that it is only in the final version that the dialogue attains its distinctive range of contrasting levels and perspectives. Precisely because this full effect emerges only in the final text, he fails to convince entirely in his fundamental criticisms of earlier commentators for concentrating on the finished work and failing to treat the development of the language in succes- sive drafts: 'Nestroys Sprache darf nicht nur an statischen fertigen "Texten" (Brill) gemessen werden, sondern man muf weit mehr als bisher den dynamischen ProzeB der Umwandlung von "Schreibe" in eine kom6diantische Sprache be- obachten.' His own tendency to overvalue the drafts even leads him to recommend that in modern performances certain details that Nestroy himself deleted should be restored - a proposal implying a trust in modern producers hardly supported by his occasional criticisms of contemporary productions. His argument is that many of the 'Plusstellen' in question were omitted by Nestroy out of cautious regard for the censor. Certainly he is right to stress that a new critical edition should take full account of the Zensurhandschrift, which is in the Osterreichische Nationalbibliothek; indeed a complete transcription of that text would have been a useful appendix to his book. It may be helpful to note that his comments on the censorship problem can be supplemented by his article 'Nestroy und die Zensur' in Theater und Gesell- schaft, edited byJ. Hein (Dusseldorf, I973), pp. 121-32.

Significantly Herles's own criticism is at its best in the interpretation of completed scenes. On the now familiar theme of the modernity of Nestroy's technique, he notes the dramatist's tendency in his drafts to conceptualize motives, and makes a number of claims that single notes or lines could have come from Brecht (also from Stanislavsky); but it is only when he is discussing the finished scenes that he advances to defining the distinctiveness of Nestroy's technique, his non-propagandist purpose and his use not so much of breaks in illusion as of'Fiktionsverwandlungen'. He also has acute observations to make on the first three scenes, which he sees as an 'overture' artistically balanced by the concluding scene of Act I - musical scenes underscoring the social implications of the whole play. And he is particularly good on Salome, on her articulate power of self-expression ('ein Wesenszug des Nestroyschen Menschen'), and the mixture of emotions she betrays in ii.8.

Where his criticism carries least conviction is when he ventures beyond the one play and attempts to place it in an historical perspective - for example, in relation to the commedia dell' arte, to the baroque theatre, or to the Zauberstiick; moreover, when he claims that Titus's entrance (1.5) marks Nestroy's break from the Singspiel tradition and his establishment of the pattern of Auftrittscouplet and monologue characteristic of the mature Possen, he is suggesting a much more precise turning- point in Nestroy's development of the satirical Couplet than is usually accepted. Apart from this question, however, his consideration of the musical element in the play is perceptive. He is certainly correct to stress its integral function in the

15

Reviews 225

This content downloaded from 185.31.194.117 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 08:41:30 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

'Posse mit Gesang'; and it is in his discussion of the Quodlibet, where again he stresses the significance of the effect of the music ('Bei Nestroy werden Hohn und Spott im Dreivierteltakt m6glich'), that he most clearly establishes his case about the urgent need for a revision of the critical edition. W. E. YATES EXETER

From Lessing to Hauptmann: Studies in German Drama. By LADISLAUS LOB. London: University Tutorial Press. I974. viii + 384 pp. ? 3.50 (paperbound CI.65).

It is pleasant, in these days of scholarly specialization, to find someone interested in familiarizing the widest possible public with the established classics of German drama. This is what Dr Lob intends to do in his present volume. He aims, in his own words, 'to provide a critical introduction to the works of six outstanding German dramatists set against the chief social, intellectual and psychological preoccupations of their times' and he directs his work to 'students of German language and literature and to others interested either in drama as such or in aspects of the German mind as expressed through one of its most vital imaginative creations' (p. v).

Dr Lob has chosen to concentrate his attention on Lessing, Schiller, Kleist, Biichner, Hebbel, and Hauptmann as the major representatives of German drama and justifies the omission of Goethe and Grillparzer from this list on the grounds that Goethe shone in genres other than the drama and that Grillparzer was Austrian. He devotes a chapter to each dramatist in turn. For each one he sets down - in parallel sequence - a summary of biographical facts and a brief review of the broad characteristics of the literary and historical period as well as of the theoretical views of the dramatist in question. Thereafter Dr Lob examines in detail the con- tent and, to a lesser degree, the formal and stylistic features of some or all of the dramatists' works. A final chapter aims at linking the various elements of the study in order to reveal trends in German drama in the last two centuries.

This book has obviously much potential interest and commends itself as a brief and succinct account of the salient points of German dramatic theory and practice. Its value is somewhat jeopardized by the ambiguity of its direction; it is surely barely possible to write with both the 'expert' and the 'beginner' (p. 3) in mind, to combine 'scrutinies in depth with elementary information' (p. 3) and at the same time produce a consistently effective book. In this instance such an attempt at compromise is at times an uneasy conjunction of tabloid information (such as, 'Schiller is Germany's supreme writer of drama in the grand style' (p. 60) or -and this in the conclusion - 'Lessing, Germany's first great playwright and critic, is the supreme literary representative of the age of "Aufklarung" as well as a herald of later movements' (p. 338)) and the kind of literary criticism which makes many assumptions. This conjunction must inevitably involve not only irritation to the expert but also heavy going for the beginner. For the same reason the specialist must find many judgements superficial and many statements vague. Nor do the introduction, which is devoted to method, and the conclusion, which is almost entirely a restatement of the findings of the previous chapters, succeed in binding together into a whole the disparate aspects of the book.

That is not to say that each chapter in isolation has little attraction for the student. On the contrary, as an introduction to the achievement of Dr Lob's chosen dramatists this book will have many eager readers. It assembles in handbook form the features of background, the distinctive pronouncements, and the outstanding qualities of just those literary movements, authors, and dramas which are of the greatest concern to the novice university student. Any book which does this must

'Posse mit Gesang'; and it is in his discussion of the Quodlibet, where again he stresses the significance of the effect of the music ('Bei Nestroy werden Hohn und Spott im Dreivierteltakt m6glich'), that he most clearly establishes his case about the urgent need for a revision of the critical edition. W. E. YATES EXETER

From Lessing to Hauptmann: Studies in German Drama. By LADISLAUS LOB. London: University Tutorial Press. I974. viii + 384 pp. ? 3.50 (paperbound CI.65).

It is pleasant, in these days of scholarly specialization, to find someone interested in familiarizing the widest possible public with the established classics of German drama. This is what Dr Lob intends to do in his present volume. He aims, in his own words, 'to provide a critical introduction to the works of six outstanding German dramatists set against the chief social, intellectual and psychological preoccupations of their times' and he directs his work to 'students of German language and literature and to others interested either in drama as such or in aspects of the German mind as expressed through one of its most vital imaginative creations' (p. v).

Dr Lob has chosen to concentrate his attention on Lessing, Schiller, Kleist, Biichner, Hebbel, and Hauptmann as the major representatives of German drama and justifies the omission of Goethe and Grillparzer from this list on the grounds that Goethe shone in genres other than the drama and that Grillparzer was Austrian. He devotes a chapter to each dramatist in turn. For each one he sets down - in parallel sequence - a summary of biographical facts and a brief review of the broad characteristics of the literary and historical period as well as of the theoretical views of the dramatist in question. Thereafter Dr Lob examines in detail the con- tent and, to a lesser degree, the formal and stylistic features of some or all of the dramatists' works. A final chapter aims at linking the various elements of the study in order to reveal trends in German drama in the last two centuries.

This book has obviously much potential interest and commends itself as a brief and succinct account of the salient points of German dramatic theory and practice. Its value is somewhat jeopardized by the ambiguity of its direction; it is surely barely possible to write with both the 'expert' and the 'beginner' (p. 3) in mind, to combine 'scrutinies in depth with elementary information' (p. 3) and at the same time produce a consistently effective book. In this instance such an attempt at compromise is at times an uneasy conjunction of tabloid information (such as, 'Schiller is Germany's supreme writer of drama in the grand style' (p. 60) or -and this in the conclusion - 'Lessing, Germany's first great playwright and critic, is the supreme literary representative of the age of "Aufklarung" as well as a herald of later movements' (p. 338)) and the kind of literary criticism which makes many assumptions. This conjunction must inevitably involve not only irritation to the expert but also heavy going for the beginner. For the same reason the specialist must find many judgements superficial and many statements vague. Nor do the introduction, which is devoted to method, and the conclusion, which is almost entirely a restatement of the findings of the previous chapters, succeed in binding together into a whole the disparate aspects of the book.

That is not to say that each chapter in isolation has little attraction for the student. On the contrary, as an introduction to the achievement of Dr Lob's chosen dramatists this book will have many eager readers. It assembles in handbook form the features of background, the distinctive pronouncements, and the outstanding qualities of just those literary movements, authors, and dramas which are of the greatest concern to the novice university student. Any book which does this must

226 226 Reviews Reviews

This content downloaded from 185.31.194.117 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 08:41:30 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions