∞∞∞∞∞∞∞
[page 67, column 2, continued:]
EDGAR ALLAN POE AND FRIEDRICH SPIELHAGEN. THEIR THEORY OF THE SHORT STORY.
The centennial anniversary of the birth of Edgar Allan Poe in January of last year was made the occasion of a widespread recognition of [page 68:] the genius of the man whose work was for so long neglected by his countrymen. The event called forth a number of celebrations throughout the country and inspired a rather voluminous output of memorial literature.
One phase of Poe's work which this latter day criticism particularly stresses is the influence which he exerted abroad, and one name which has been associated with his is that of Friedrich Spielhagen, the German novelist who from about the middle of the century, for a period of about thirty years, was the acknowledged master of the German novel until his fame was eclipsed by the “moderns.” Spielhagen's eightieth birthday occurred in February of last year and it is interesting to note that it called forth only a few sketches, inspired for the most part by that sense of charitable respect which a new generation, controlled by new masters and new ideas, offers to the dethroned magnate of a previous one. Doubtless it is a fact not now generally known that the once famous Altmeister of the German novel is still living in Berlin to-day. Spielhagen in his old age has suffered the same fate which was Poe's for many years after the latter’ s death. One wonders involuntarily if history will extend the analogy further and rescue Spielhagen’ s name from the oblivion with which the new Gods have for the time invested it.
But this analogy in external circumstances is not the point of primary importance suggested by the almost co-incident birth anniversaries of these two men. Of more significant interest is the fact that Spielhagen, as a student of Poe and in the valuation of a certain phase of Poe’ s work, anticipated the American and English critics and absorbed himself certain ideas from the American poet, which ideas he transplanted to German soil. Their fruition is just now becoming apparent.
Spielhagen’ s interest in Poe dates from an early period, as he himself states in his autobiography.(1) His first acquaintance with Poe was gathered from Griswold's Poets and Poetry of America. Spielhagen discusses Poe's analysis of the Raven in The Philosophy of Composition.(2) In the collection [column 2:] of essays entitled Aus meiner Studienmappe,(3) Spielhagen has an extended essay on the Poe-Longfellow controversy. While the essay bears the title Edgar Poe gegen Henry Longfellow, it is largely a discussion of Poe's theory of lyric poetry. Spielhagen is ostensibly investigating the justice of Poe's charges of plagiarism against Longfellow. He asks himself two questions by way of solving his problem. “ Wie weit ist Poe's Theorie der lyrischen Dichtkunst richtig? an die sich dann die der zweiten knupfen wird; oder wie weit ist demnach seine Anklage gegen Longfellow gerechtfertigt?”
The question of primary interest in this investigation is just how Spielhagen formulates Poe's theory of lyric poetry. The discussion as to whether this theory is the correct one or not is of less significance. Spielhagen begins and ends his formulation of Poe's theory of lyric poetry by quoting a sentence from the latter’ s Poetic Principle.(4) “I need scarcely say that a poem deserves its title only inasmuch as it excites by elevating the soul. The value of the poem is in the ratio of this elevating excitement.” This exciting moment constitutes, according to Spielhagen, the criterion by which Poe measures the value of a lyrical production, Numerous other excerpts are made from the Poetic Principle in which Poe deals with the legitimacy of the didactic and the moral element in lyric poetry. Spielhagen then goes from the theory of the Poetic Principle to its practical application in the essay of Poe's entitled Longfellow's Ballads.(5) Poe exploits in this production the same theory, many of the paragraphs agreeing literally with portions of the text of the Poetic Principle. But Spielhagen reverts constantly to this idea of the exalting effect of a poem as Poe's criterion of its excellence. The processes of technique which contribute to this result are also discussed. Such as brevity, elimination of details, climactic effect, etc. But it is always the capacity for inducing this excitement by “elevating the soul” which is the measure of the value of a lyric poem as Spielhagen interprets Poe. [page 69:]
After having asked himself how far Poe's theory is correct, Spielhagen adds this striking observation: “Denn unzweifelhaft hat der Lyriker Poe, wenn er auch von aller Poesie zu sprechen scheint, auch vielfach wirklich spricht, oder doch sprechen will, bei Aufstellung seiner Siitze immerdar seine spezielle Kunst (lyric poetry) vor Augen gehabt; ebenso wie er das Material zu diesen Sätzen und die Beweisführung derselben unmittelbar aus seinen individuellen dichterischen Erfahrungen schöpfte.”(6)
When Spielhagen speaks of Poe’ s “spezielle Kunst,” he means thereby lyric poetry. He is therefore saying in the above that Poe's Poetic Principle is, strictly speaking, a principle of lyric poetry. And further that the author of the Raven being essentially a lyrist, deduced for himself a theory of lyric poetry by which he proceeded to measure all other poetic genres. And finally, that Poe applies his standard for lyric poetry alike to the epic, the drama, and the short story.
Poe's discussions of this matter in his essays are too well known to require quotation here. Spielhagen arrays together all those passages in the Poetic Principle and in the essay Longfellow's Ballads which deal with the subject. His conclusions are obvious and convincing. Poe's theory of the drama, the epic, and the short story, when reduced to its last analysis, is but his theory of lyric verse. The value of all literary types is to be measured by their capacity to “excite, by elevating the soul.” Let us look for a moment at Poe's theory of the tale and observe how closely it echoes his idea of lyric poetry. There is perhaps no better statement of it than in the essay on Hawthorne.(7)
In this essay Poe in two consecutive paragraphs outlines his theory of a poem and a short story. In thus collocating his ideas he himself furnishes the demonstration of the correctness of Spielhagen’ s contention of the identity of his theory of the poem and the tale. Let us hear the first of these paragraphs:
“Were bidden to how the highest genius could be most advantageously employed for display powers, best own should answer [column 2:] without hesitation — in the composition of a rhymed poem, not to exceed in length what might be perused in an hour. Within this limit alone can the highest order of true poetry exist. I need only here say, upon this topic, that, in almost all classes of composition, the unity of effect or impression is a point of the greatest importance. It is clear, moreover, that this unity cannot be thoroughly preserved in productions whose perusals cannot be completed at one sitting. We may continue the reading of a prose composition, from the very nature of prose itself, much longer than we can persevere, to any good purpose, in the perusal of a poem. This latter, if truly fulfilling the demands of the poetic sentiment, induces an exaltation of the soul which cannot be long sustained. All high excitements are necessarily transient. Thus a long poem is a parodox. And, without unity of impression, the deepest effects cannot be brought about. Epics were the offsprings of an imperfect sense of Art, and their reign is no more. A poem too brief may produce a vivid, but never an intense or enduring impression. Without a certain continuity of effect — without a certain duration or repetition of purpose — the soul is never deeply moved.”
The next paragraph outlines his theory of the tale:
“Were I called upon to designate that class of composition which, next to such a poem as I have suggested should best fulfill the demands of high genius — should offer it the most advantageous field of exertion — I should unhesitatingly speak of the prose tale, as Mr. Hawthorne has here exemplified it. I allude to the short prose narrative, requiring from a half hour to one or two hours in its perusal. The ordinary novel is objectionable, from its length, for reasons already stated in substance. As it cannot be read at one sitting, it deprives itself, of course, of the immense force derivable from totality. Worldly interests intervening during the pauses of the perusal, modify, annul, or counteract, in greater or less degree, the impressions of the book. But simple cessation in reading, would of itself, be sufficient to destroy the true unity. In the brief tale, however, the author is enabled to carry out the fulness of his intention, be it what it may. During the hour of perusal the soul of the reader is at the writer's control. There are no external or intrinsic influences — resulting from weariness or interruption.”
“A skilful literary artist has constructed a tale. If wise, he has not fashioned his thoughts to accommodate his incidents; but having conceived with deliberate care a certain unique or single effect to be wrought out, he then invents such [page 70:] incidents — he then combines such events as may best aid him in establishing this preconceived effect. If his very initial sentence tend not to the outbringing of this effect, then he has failed in his first step. In the whole composition there should be no word written, of which the tendency, direct or indirect, is not to the one pre-established design. And by such means, with such care and skill, a picture is at length painted which leaves in the mind of him who contemplates it with a kindred art, a sense of the fullest satisfaction. The idea of the tale has been presented unblemished, because undisturbed; and this is an end unattainable by the novel. Undue brevity is just as exceptional here as in the poem; but undue length is yet more to be avoided.”
Exactly the same idea is elaborated in each of the two paragraphs above. “Totality of effect” is the very basic stone in the structure of Poe's theory. The phrase recurs repeatedly in all of his essays. The poem and the tale must produce a single effect, an effect of “totality, “and “during the hour of perusal the soul of the reader is at the writer's control,” which is exactly that excitement “which elevates the soul” which is Poe's measure of the lyric poem.
In an address delivered at the Poe centennial at the University of Virginia January 19, 1909, Prof. C. Alphonso Smith says: “The central question with Poe was not ‘How may I write a beautiful poem or tell an interesting story,’ but ‘How may I produce the maximum of effect with the minimum of means?’ This practical, scientific strain in his work becomes more dominating during all his short working period. His poems, his stories, and his criticisms cannot be understood without constant reference to this criterion of craftsmanship.” It is this structural side of Poe's genius which Prof. Smith regards as distinctively American and it is this phase of his work which, for future generations, will stand out more prominently against the background of the sum of his poetic achievement. Prof. Smith prophecies for Poe the literary craftsman, the inventor of the modern short story, an ever increasing renown.
It is a singular fact that Spielhagen's interest in Poe was centered largely in this one side of his work. Brief mention is made of Poe's verse, but Spielhagen's discussions of and references to Poe have to do, for the most part, with the latter’ s theory of lyric verse. More singular still is the [column 2:] fact that it was reserved for this German to call attention for the first time to the fact that Poe's theory of poetry was likewise his theory of the short story. That the production of an effect — an effect of totality — by means of an exalted or excited state of mind, is the aim of both the poem and the tale. In short, that the laws of structure which underlie the Raven and William Wilson are the same.
Poe himself regarded his criticism as his most serious work. Posterity is just now beginning to confirm his judgment. American and English critics are beginning to credit him with the founding of the short story as a new literary type. Prof. Brander Matthews says: “Poe first laid down the principles which governed his own construction and which have been quoted very often, because they have been accepted by the masters of the short story in every modern language.”He might have added that the “ principles which governed his own construction “were the same whether applied to the construction of a poem or a short story. But he did not make that observation. The credit for this is due to Spielhagen. It is in this sense that the German anticipated by several decades the most recent recognition of a new side of Poe's work; namely, his constructive genius, that phase of his production which was for so long neglected.
But Spielhagen's service as an interpreter of Poe is not bounded by the primacy of his recognition of the identity of those structural principles which Poe applied alike to the lyric poem and to the short story. The German novelist was also a theorist. Like Poe he endeavored to define for himself the principles which governed his own art. And his theory of the novelle is practically a restatement of Poe's theory of lyric poetry and the short story. It echoes Poe's views to such an extent that the conclusion that Spielhagen imbibed it from Poe is hardly to be avoided. The former thus becomes the first exponent in Germany of the Poe doctrine of the tale, and likewise the medium of transmission of this doctrine to German soil.
The following citations from Spielhagen's critical writings are characteristic. “Der Roman [page 71:] hat es weniger auf eine moglichst interessante Handluug abgesehen, als auf eine moglichst vollkommene Uebersicht der Breite und Weite des Mensclienlebens. Er braucht deshalb uud gerade zu seinen Hauptpersonen nicht Menschen, die schon fertig sind, und, weil sie es sind, wo immer sie eingreifen, die Situation zu einera raschen Abschluss bringen, sondern solche Individuen, die noch in der Entwickelung stehn, infolgedessen eine bestimmeiide Wirkung nicht wohl ausiiben konnen, vielmehr selbst durch die Verhaltnisse, durch die Menscheu ihrer Umgebung, in ihrer Bildung, Entwickelung bestimmt werden, und so dem Dichter Gelegenheit geben, ja ihn notigen, deii Leser auf grossen, weiteu (allerdings moglichst blumenreichen) Umwegen zu seinem Ziele zu fiihren.”(9)
Spielhagen here arrives at his characterization of the novelle negatively. But his theory is clear.
“Nun aber mogen wir die Goethesche Definition in den Gespriichen mit Eckermann ‘ Was ist die Novelle anders als eine sich ereignete unerho’rte Begebeuheit? ‘ einfach acceptiren, oder an die erweiterte Form und psychologische Vertiefung denken, welche diese Dichtungsart in der neuern Literatur gcfunden hat, immer wird ihr Charakter bleiben, dass sie zum Unterschiede vom Roman, in welchem eine Entwicklung der Charaktere, mindestens des Helden stattfindet fertige Charaktere aufeinander treffen liisst, die sich in dem Kontakt nur zu entfalten, gewisserinassen auseinanderzuwickeln habeii. Weiter : dass, damit die Wirkung des Koutaktes sich nicht zersplittere, nur wenige Personen in Mitleideaschaft gezogen werden du’rfen, und so das Resultat bald hervorspringen, d. h., die dargestellte Handlung kurzlebig sein wird.”(10)
“Mit der Novelle steht es anders und besser. Zwar schwankt auch ihre Definition in der Aesthetik; aber man glaubt doch zu wissen, dass sie die Erzahlung einer merkwiirdigen Begebenheit sein soil. Das ist sie denn auch bei den alten Meistern, denen sich noch unser Kleist ruhmreich anreihte. Dann haben friiher und spater grosse Kiinstler wie Goethe, Tieck, Brentano, [column 2:] Storm, Keller, Heyse und wer ware da nicht zu nennen! das alte etwas enge und trockne Schema crweitert und bereichert, bis das Gebilde schliesslich eine frappante Aehnlichkeit mit den letzten Akten oder mit dem letzten Akte eines Dramas hatte, von denen oder dem es sich fast nur noch durch das Wegbleiben der dialogischen Form unterschied.(11)
Spielhagen is interested in drawing a line of demarkation between the novel and the short story. The peculiar nature of the latter he finds in the fact that the short story deals with ready made characters in contradistinction to those in process of development. The action is simple, the number of characters restricted to a few and the action concentrated into one definite effect. It is exactly Poe's theory of the tale. It is that same “totality of effect” born of brevity and the nice choice of the component parts which Poe urges so persistently for the lyric poem and the short story. In thus defining the theory of the novelle Spielhagen becomes the intermediary between Poe and those “masters of the short story” in Germany to whom Prof. Matthews refers.
In this connection an interesting suggestion is offered in a critique of Spielhagen by one of the “moderns,” no very sympathetic critic therefore.
“Nun frage ich im Hinblick auf die Ausfiihrungen, welche ich bisher gegeben, was sind denn alle Erzahlungen Spielhagens von den problematischen Naturen bis zu Hammer und Arnboss, bis zu Plattland anders als Darstellungen eines kleinen scharf begrenzten Ausschnittes des grossen Weltgetriebes, was anders also, denn nach der Meinung des Verfassers, Novellen! Und in der That, Spielhagen ist mehr Novellist, als Romnnerziihler, seine Romane sind dramatisch concentrirt, nicht episch breit, sie bieten nicht eine Welt von Bildern wie der Don Quijote, sondern drehen sich festgefiigt, um ein oder zwei Probleme.”(12)
The statement is that Spielhagen is nominally a novelist, but that in the architecture of his novels he employs the technique of the short story writer. [page 72:] That his narratives do not gradually unfold like a series of pictures, but that they are dramatically concentrated around one point.
Hart's criticism of Spielhagen's novels, taken in connection with the foregoing discussion, suggests easily that Spielhagen was not content with the acceptance and exploitation in Germany of Poe's theory of the short story, but that he also made practical application of it in the construction of his own novels. This question, however, would furnish the subject for a more extended investigation.
PALMER COBB.
University of North Carolina.
[The following footnotes appear at the bottom of page 68, column 1:]
1 Finder und Erfinder. Erinnerungen cms meinem Leben. Fr. Spielhagen, Leipzig, 1890, p. 287.
2 Beiträge zur Theorie und Tecknik des Romans. Friedrich Spielhagen, Leipzig, 1883. p. 9
[The following footnotes appear at the bottom of page 68, column 2:]
3 Berlin, 1891, p. 101.
4 The Complete Works of Edgar Allan Poe. Edited by James A. Harrison, N. Y., 1902, Vol. 14, p. 266.
5 Harrison, Vol. II, p. 68 ff.
[The following footnotes appear at the bottom of page 69, column 1:]
6 Aus meiner Studienmappe, p. 148.
7 Harrison, Vol. II, p. 106 ff.
[The following footnotes appear at the bottom of page 70, column 2:]
8 The Short Story: Specimens Illustrating its Development, 1907, p. 25.
[The following footnotes appear at the bottom of page 71, column 1:]
9 Beiträge zur Theorie und Tecknik des Romans, Leipzig, 1883, p. 245.
10 Neue Beiträge zur Theorie und Technik der Epik und Dramatik, Leipzig, 1898, p. 74.
[The following footnotes appear at the bottom of page 71, column 2:]
11 Neue Beiträge, p. 162.
12 Kritische Waffengänge. Friednch Spielhagen und der deutsche Roman der Gegenwart. Heinrich and Julius Hart, Leipzig, 1884, p. 70 ff.
∞∞∞∞∞∞∞
Notes:
None.
∞∞∞∞∞∞∞
[S:0 - MLN, 1910] - Edgar Allan Poe Society of Baltimore - A Poe Bookshelf - Edgar Allan Poe and Friedrich Spielhagen (Palmer Cobb, 1910)