Part 1 (2/2)

Having thus introduced the subject in its most general bearings and aspects, it remains for us to review briefly its historical background.

Weltschmerz is essentially a symptom of a period of conflict, of transition. The powerful reaction which marks the eighteenth century--a reaction against all traditional intellectual authority, and a struggle for the emanc.i.p.ation of the individual, of research, of inspiration and of genius--reached its high-water mark in Germany in the seventies. But with the unrestrained outbursts of the champions of Storm and Stress the problem was by no means solved; there remained the basic conflict between the idea of personal liberty and the strait-jacket of Frederician absolutism, the conflict between the dynastic and the national idea of the state. Should the individual yield a blind, unreasoned submission to the state as to a divinely inst.i.tuted arbitrary authority, good or bad, or was the state to be regarded as the conscious and voluntary cooperation of its subjects for the general good? It was, moreover, a time not only of open and active revolt, as represented by the spirit of Klinger, but also of great emotional stirrings, and sentimental yearnings of such pa.s.sive natures as Holty. Rousseau's plea for a simplified and more natural life had exerted a mighty influence.

And what has a most important bearing upon the relation between these intellectual currents and Weltschmerz--these minds were lacking in the discipline implied in our modern scientific training. Scientific exactness of thinking had not become an integral part of education.

Hence the difference between the pessimism of Ibsen and the romantic Weltschmerz of these uncritical minds.

In accounting for the tremendous effect produced by his ”Werther,”

Goethe compares his work to the bit of fuse which explodes the mine, and says that the shock of the explosion was so great because the young generation of the day had already undermined itself, and its members now burst forth individually with their exaggerated demands, unsatisfied pa.s.sions and imaginary sufferings.[6] And in estimating the influences which had prepared the way for this mental disposition, Goethe emphasizes the influence of English literature. Young's ”Night Thoughts,” Gray's ”Elegy,” Goldsmith's ”Deserted Village,” even ”Hamlet”

and his monologues haunted all minds. ”Everyone knew the princ.i.p.al pa.s.sages by heart, and everyone believed he had a right to be just as melancholy as the Prince of Denmark, even though he had seen no ghost and had no royal father to avenge.” Finally Ossian had provided an eminently suitable setting,--under the darkly lowering sky the endless gray heath, peopled with the shadowy forms of departed heroes and withered maidens. To quote the substance of Goethe's criticism:[7] Amid such influences and surroundings, occupied with fads and studies of this sort, lacking all incentive from without to any important activity and confronted by the sole prospect of having to drag out a humdrum existence, men began to reflect with a sort of sullen exultation upon the possibility of departing this life at will, and to find in this thought a scant amelioration of the ills and tedium of the times. This disposition was so general that ”Werther” itself exerted a powerful influence, because it everywhere struck a responsive chord and publicly and tangibly exhibited the true inwardness of a morbid youthful illusion.[8]

Nor did the dawning nineteenth century bring relief. No other period of Prussian history, says Heinrich von Treitschke,[9] is wrapped in so deep a gloom as the first decade of the reign of Frederick William III. It was a time rich in hidden intellectual forces, and yet it bore the stamp of that uninspired Philistinism which is so abundantly evidenced by the barren commonplace character of its architecture and art. Genius there was, indeed, but never were its opportunities for public usefulness more limited. It was as though the greatness of the days of the second Frederick lay like a paralyzing weight upon this generation. And this oppressing sense of impotence was followed, after the Napoleonic Wars, by the bitterness of disappointment, all the more keenly felt by reason of this first reawakening of the national consciousness. Great had been the expectations, enormous the sacrifice; exceedingly small was the gain to the individual.[10] And the resultant dissonance was the same as that to which Alfred de Musset gave expression in the words: ”The malady of the present century is due to two causes; the people who have pa.s.sed through 1793 and 1814 bear in their hearts two wounds. All that was is no more; all that will be is not yet. Do not hope to find elsewhere the secret of our ills.”[11]

This then in briefest outline is the transition from the century of individualism and autocracy to the nineteenth century of democracy.

Small wonder that the struggle claimed its victims in those individuals who, unable to find a firm basis of conviction and principle, vacillated constantly between instinctive adherence to old traditions, and unreasoned inclination to the new order of things.

FOOTNOTES:

[Footnote 1: ”Pessimism, a History and a Criticism,” London, 1877.]

[Footnote 2: Ed. von Hartmann: ”Zur Geschichte und Begrundung des Pessimismus,” Leipzig, Hermann Haacke, p. 187.]

[Footnote 3: ”Les Poetes Lyriques de l'Autriche,” Paris, 1886, p. 293.]

[Footnote 4: ”Vortrage und Aufsatze zur Geschichte des geistigen Lebens in Deutschland und Oesterreich,” Berlin, 1874, p. 413.]

[Footnote 5: Act 5, Sc. 2.]

[Footnote 6: ”Goethes Werke,” Weimar ed. Vol. 28, p. 227 f.]

[Footnote 7: _Ibid._, p. 216 f.]

[Footnote 8: In view of Goethe's own words, then, the caution of a recent critic (Felix Melchior in _Litt. Forsch._ XXVII Heft, Berlin, 1903) against applying the term Weltschmerz to ”Werther,” would seem to miss the mark entirely. Werther is a type, just as truly as is Faust, though in a smaller way, and the malady which he typifies has its ultimate origin in the development of public life,--the very condition which this critic insists upon as a mark of Weltschmerz in the proper application of the term.]

[Footnote 9: ”Historische und politische Aufsatze,” Leipzig, 1897. Vol.

4.]

[Footnote 10: As early as 1797 Holderlin's Hyperion laments: ”Mein Geschaft auf Erden ist aus. Ich bin voll Willens an die Arbeit gegangen, habe geblutet daruber, und die Welt um keinen Pfennig reicher gemacht.”

(”Holderlin's gesammelte Dichtungen, herausgegeben von B. Litzmann,”

Stuttgart, Cotta, undated. Vol. II, p. 68.) Several decades later Heine writes: ”Ich kann mich uber die Siege meiner liebsten Ueberzeugungen nicht recht freuen, da sie mir gar zu viel gekostet haben. Da.s.selbe mag bei manchem ehrlichen Manne der Fall sein, und es tragt viel bei zu der grossen dusteren Verstimmung der Gegenwart.” (Brief vom 21 April, 1851, an Gustav Kolb; Werke, Karpeles ed. Vol. IX, p. 378.)]

[Footnote 11: ”Confession d'un enfant du siecle.” Oeuvres compl. Paris, 1888 (Charpentier). Vol. VIII, p. 24.]

<script>