Georg Büchner

A. H. J. Knight

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2020
• Print ISBN: 9780367856168
• eBook ISBN: 9781000768077
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Literature
• Subtopic: German Literary Criticism
• Index: Literature

Originally published in 1951 this full length study gives an account of Büchner's life and personality, together with an account of his three plays, his unfinished short story, his scientific publications and his translations of Hugo.

III

BÜCHNER’S WORKS

A. Dantons Tod

Except for Der Hessische Landbote, which can hardly be classified as literature, Dantons Tod¹ is, as we have seen, Büchner’s first original work, and his most impressive finished production. It was, we recall, completed in February 1835, and published very soon afterwards, parts of it as early as March 26, and the whole thing by July. The letters giving Büchner’s views on human character, history, historical drama in general, and Dantons Tod in particular, sent to Gutzkow and to the Büchner family, apropos of the play, have already been fully discussed, and it is therefore unnecessary to do more than refer a reader back to that discussion, save only in respect of the last and most important of those letters, that written to the family on July 28, 1835, which is worth recapitulating, with brief comments, in abbreviated form, under six headings. These are as follows :

1. The historical dramatist must approach as nearly as he can to actual historical truth: his work must be neither more moral nor less moral than history itself: history was not created as reading matter for young ladies. Comment: This presupposes that the ‘actual’ facts of history are ascertainable; and it implies, too, that in Büchner’s view the historical dramatist, like the professional historian, must not be a partisan.

2. The dramatist who has chosen to write about the French Revolution must represent the leaders of that revolution as they were; that is, as dissolute, atheistical, and obscene. Comment: This is an exact repetition of a remark in the letter of May 5, 1835, and it is a true description of the picture which Büchner actually tried to paint in Dantons Tod. Nor, says Büchner, has anyone the right to criticize an author for choosing such a theme : such criticism would logically entail the rejection of the greatest masterpieces of poetry. Comment: The argument is mildly disingenuous : nobody compelled Büchner to choose this theme.

¹ Much of the following discussion of Dantons Tod was published in The Modern Language Review for January 1947, under the tide ‘Some considerations relating to Georg Büchner’s opinions on history and the drama and to his play Dantons Tod, The article has been radically revised and considerably expanded for the purposes of this book.

3. The poet, he says (herein obviously arguing against Schiller and his followers, but by implication also against Lessing and Aristotle, to mention no one else), is not a teacher of morality, but a creator of characters and a re-creator, a reviver, of past times. Men are to learn from poetry about realities, about that which actually has happened, and actually does happen, in the world around them. For this reason, especially, it is senseless for people to be too ‘nice’, and to object to ‘improprieties’ in literature: they might just as well object to life itself, since life is partly made up of ‘improper’ things.

4. Anyhow, he himself does not want to represent the world as better than God made it. God presumably knew what he was doing, and no doubt made the world ‘as it should be’. Comment: It would be not merely rash but crazy to deduce from these sentences either that Büchner was at this point a Christian believer (or, indeed, a Theist at all), or that he was a Leibnizian optimist, who believed that the existing world is the best of all possible worlds. The evidence of other passages in his letters and other works is overwhelmingly against any such deductions, and the phraseology must be interpreted as a mere convenient façon de parler. In fact, Dantons Tod itself is a work of total pessimism.

5. The so-called idealistic poets are sharply condemned. Büchner is, as always, on the side of Shakespeare and Goethe (his earliest literary enthusiasms), and against Schiller. Comment: We know that even in his schooldays Büchner had disliked Schiller’s rhetoric and pathos.

6. It is inevitable that anyone who expresses views which are not those of the present régime will be unfavourably criticized by the paid hacks of the German governments; such criticism is valueless, but Büchner is quite modest about his play, and will welcome genuine, aesthetic comments on it.

We have already discussed the extremely difficult, not to say tragic, circumstances in which Dantons Tod was written, after the collapse of the political agitation and the end, at any rate for the time being, of all Büchner’s hopes of effecting anything in the way of political reforms; and we have considered the extremely emotional letter in which Büchner commended the work to Gutzkow, and noted Gutzkow’s favourable, intelligent reaction. Very shortly afterwards, considerable portions of Dantons Tod were published in Gutzkow’s periodical, Phonix, between March 26 and April 7, 1835: the gaps between the printed sections were filled up by résumés, composed by Gutzkow, of the omitted passages. It is to this partial publication that Büchner alludes in the letter to his parents dated May 5, 1835. Later in the year came the first printed version of the full text, edited (carelessly and incompetently) by Eduard Duller, under the title Dantons Tod. Dramatische Bilder aus Frankreichs Schreckensherrschaft von Georg Büchner.¹ Frankfurt a.M. Druck und Verlag von J.D. Sauerländer. 1835. It is against the distortions and mutilations of this notoriously bad text that Büchner so vehemently protests at the beginning of his letter of July 28, 1835.

A complete MS. of Dantons Tod in Büchner’s own hand is in existence, but it is thought to be a rough, not a fair, copy. It is full of deletions and alterations, and the first printed version is often not merely radically different, but in every sense much better, in spite of its notorious inadequacies. It thus seems pretty certain that there once existed a fair copy made for the purpose of publication, and that this has been lost, presumably in Sauerländer’s office. The textual position is thus not altogether satisfactory, but, in comparison with most of Büchner’s works, and especially with Woyzeck, it is reasonably straightforward: though an authentic text has not been quite unambiguously determined by the one existing MS. and the earliest printed versions, critical research has not found it unduly difficult to produce something that is at least broadly acceptable. This, the Inselverlag text, is taken as authentic for the purposes of the present discussion: the editor has printed the variant readings at the end of the volume.

One of the most remarkable things about Dantons Tod is the suddenness with which Büchner wrote it, suddenness as opposed to, or in addition to, the actual speed of composition (five weeks, as he tells us in the famous letter to Gutzkow). For up to this point Büchner had shown no signs, at the most very faint signs, of possessing literary gifts, and during his school and university days none of his friends had observed in him any indication that he was likely to be a writer. The style of Der Hessische Landbote, in those parts which Büchner himself composed, is simple, direct, fierce; the letters are immensely interesting, but, though well written, quite unhterary; the school exercises, as we saw, had contained some fascinating material, but no evidence of poetical, let alone dramatic, gifts. It is quite extraordinary, if not altogether unprecedented, that anyone should compose a play not merely so good as Dantons Tod, but above all so immensely original, in its form as well as in some of its ideas, almost like a conjurer producing a rabbit out of a hat. In fact, the play must really have been wrung out of him under the pressure of events, by which I do not mean just the external circumstances, but more particularly the emotions and despairs of the period before he fled. There is no doubt that he had received a shattering blow from the events of the last months; no doubt, either, that for the time being at any rate, and, so far as we know, for the rest of his short life, he had concluded, not merely that he must and should refrain from all political activity, but also that any political activity, in existing circumstances, was useless and hopeless. The letter of July 1835, to Wilhelm Büchner, already quoted, is the best, but not the only proof of this : ‘Ich habe mich seit einem halben Jahre [i.e. since January] volkommen uberzeugt, dass nichts zu tun ist und dass jeder, der im Augenblicke sich aufopfert, seine Haut wie ein Narr zu Markte trägt. . . ich weiss, . . . dass jeder Versuch nicht zum geringsten Resultate führt’. The result of this kind of defeatism upon the content of Dantons Tod, and upon all Büchner’s subsequent behefs concerning man, society, progress, and necessity, can be and sometimes has been exaggerated, but it must in no circumstances be overlooked. Fundamentally Dantons Tod is, as Viëtor has called it,¹ ‘Die Tragödie des heldischen Pessimismus’.

¹ The sub-title (Dramatische Bilder, etc.) was not Büchner’s own, but the publisher’s, intended as a sort of puff. It is evident from a letter of Gutzkow’s to Büchner, dated July 23, 1835 (S. W.B., 617), that Büchner was irritated by this interpolation, and quite rightly, too, for it is a false description of the ideas underlying the play, and has, in fact, been a stumbling-block ever since. Gutzkow apologizes, in the letter mentioned, for the ‘Schreckenstitel... eine der buchhandlerischen Dreistigkeiten, die man sich bei seinem zweiten Buche nicht mehr gefallen lässt’.

Büchner’s version of his theme is based, in the first place, on three definite, unmistakable literary sources. These are: (a) Mignet, Histoire de la Révolution française, II (Paris, 1826, Leipzig, 1827), pp. 1 ff.; (b) Thiers, Histoire de la Révolution française, VI (Paris, 1825 and 1834), pp. 105 ff.; (c) Unsere Zeit oder geschichtliche Uebersicht der merkwür-digsten Ereignisse von ij8$ bis isjo, nach den vorzuglichsten französischen, englischen, und deutschen Werken bearbeitet von einem ehemaligen Offizier der kaiserlich-franzosischen Armée (Stuttgart, 1826-30). The author of this compilation was Konrad Friedrich, who used the pseudonym Carl Strahlheim. From one or another of these books, plus one or two minor sources, used, it seems, fairly impartially, Büchner seems to have derived a very high proportion of the external events in Dantons Tod, doing this, no doubt, in pursuit of the ideal of faithful reproduction of the ascertainable facts of history, as laid down in his quoted letters. He carries the process to unusual lengths, even to the extent of quoting whole speeches by Danton and others almost verbatim: on the other hand there are several scenes, some important matters, and many small details in which he departs entirely from his authorities and relies upon his own invention.¹ Apart from these direct, so to speak positive, sources, Büchner wrote under the influence of several earlier dramatists, mostly recent German writers, whose effect upon him, though unmistakable, is hard to define with precision.

¹ In his article on Dantons Tod as ‘Die Tragödie des heldischen Pessimismus’ in the Deutsche Vierteljahrsschrift für Literaturwissenschaft und Geistesgeschichte, Vol. XII (1934), pp. 173 ff.

At this point, however, before embarking upon any discussion of such influences or relationships, it may be convenient to give a fairly detailed analysis of the drama scene by scene, avoiding comment, so far as possible, for the present, but letting the action speak for itself. This is all the more necessary since, in spite of the existence of the two English translations already mentioned, and the warm but not always well-informed praise which Mr. Stephen Spender, conspicuous among Enghsh critics in this respect, has let fall from time to time, the work is not well known in England, and is seldom read, let alone performed. Certainly it has not been analysed in detail.

The action takes place in the centre of revolutionary Paris, and extends over a space of twelve days, from March 24 to April 5, 1794. The political situation at the beginning is, that Hébert and his extreme revolutionary faction have just been destroyed, thanks to a momentary and unreal co-operation between the Girondists, Danton’s² party, now a party of moderation and ‘liberalism’ (though previously associated with, or responsible for, some of the bloodier deeds of the Revolution, especially the ‘September Massacres’), and the Jacobins. The association is, however, totally unreal; in times of revolution dog, so to speak, does eat dog, and parties annihilate one another until an equihbrium is reached in the dictatorship of the one surviving faction. The penultimate stage in this process has now been reached: two parties alone are left, and the clash between them is imminent.

Analysis of the action:

• 1,1. A drawing-room, with the Deputy Hérault-Séchelles and some ladies playing cards, and Danton and his young wife Julie talking.
• (a) i. Conversation between Danton and Julie on the subject of love and death, a conversation which contains a characteristic utterance by Danton, typical of his personality throughout this play, and typical, too, of Büchner’s own feelings of isolation and despair at the time when he was writing. It runs: julie. Glaubst du an mich?

¹ The matter of the sources, and Büchner’s use of them, is discussed very fully and scientifically by Viëtor in ‘Die Quellen von Büchners Drama Dantons Tod’ (Euphorion, Vol. XXXIV (1933), pp. 357-78).

² Danton, of course, was not actually a Girondist but a Jacobin imposed upon the Girondist ministry as Minister of Justice in the late summer of 1792, in order to keep an eye upon them. In the course of his collaboration with the ministry, however, he had more and more genuinely approached their point of view and shed his original, purely Jacobin, principles.

DANTON. Was weiss ich? Wir wissen wenig voneinander. Wir sind Dickhäuter, wir strecken die Hände nacheinander aus, aber es ist ver-gebliche Muhe, wir reiben nur das grobe Leder aneinander ab — wir sind sehr einsam.

JULIE. Du kennst mich, Danton.

DANTON. Ja, was man so kennen heisst. Du hast dunkle Augen und lockiges Haar und einen feinen Teint und sagst immer zu mir: lieber Georg ! Aber (er deutet ihr auf Stirn und Augen) da, da, was liegt hinter dem? Geh, wir haben grobe Sinne. Einander kennen? Wir mussten uns die Schädeldecken aufbrechen und die Gedanken einander aus den Hirnfasern zerren.

• ii. A frivolous and unimportant conversation among the other characters.
• (b) Two more of Danton’s friends enter, .and a political conversation arises, in which at first Danton takes no part. The general line of talk is, first, whether the Revolution has not now gone far enough, second, more generally, on the question of politics versus hedonism. Danton’s own intervention in the conversation, at the very end, is slight, and designed only to show that he is completely bored and disillusioned with politics.
• I, 2. (a) A street scene. A more or less comic family quarrel between a poor citizen and his wife, in which several other citizens intervene. The general theme is that virtue is possible only for well-to-do women, the daughters of the poor are compelled by economic necessity to become prostitutes. The conversation takes a more and more violently political turn: ‘Sie [i.e. the leaders] haben uns gesagt: schlagt die Aristokraten tot, das sind Wolfe ! Wir haben die Aristokiaten an die Laternen gehängt. Sie haben gesagt: das Veto frisste euer Brot; wir haben das Veto totgeschlagen. Sie haben gesagt: die Gironchsten hungern euch aus; wir haben die Girondisten guillotiniert. Aber sie haben die Toten ausgezogen, und wir laufen wie zuvor auf nackten Beinen und frieren. Wir wollen ihnen die Haut von den Schenkeln Ziehen und uns Hosen daraus machen, wir wollen ihnen das Fett auslassen und unsere Suppe mit schmelzen. Fort ! Totgeschlagen, wer kein Loch im Rock hat’ !’
• (b) A young man is brought in: the crowd propose to hang him for having a handkerchief: he is let off as a reward for making a witty remark.
• (c) Robespierre and his following arrive He calms the excited mob with the following speech: ‘Armes, tugendhaftes Volk! Du tust deine Pflicht, du opferst deine Feinde. Volk, du bist gross! Du offenbarst dich unter Blitzstrahlen und Donnerschlägen. Aber, Volk, deine Streiche dürfen deinen eignen Leib nicht verwunden; du mordest dich selbst in deinem Grimm. Du kannst nur durch deine eigne Kraft fallen, das wissen deine Feinde. Deine Gesetzgeber wachen, sie werden deine Hände führen; ihre Augen sind untrugbar, deine Hände sind unentrinnbar. Ko...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Original Title Page
• Original Copyright Page
• Prefatory Note
• Table of Contents
• I. Introduction
• II. Büchner’s Life, Letters, and Personality
• III. Büchner’s Works
• IV. Conclusion
• Bibliography
• Index