The Literature of Weimar Classicism by Simon Richter
2007; Modern Humanities Research Association; Volume: 102; Issue: 2 Linguagem: Inglês
10.1353/mlr.2007.0352
ISSN2222-4319
Autores Resumo558 Reviews The Literature ofWeimar Classicism. Ed. by SIMON RICHTER. (Camden House His toryofGerman Literature, 7) Rochester, NY: Camden House. 2005. xii + 407 pp. $90; ?50. ISBN 978-I-57II3-249-9. In an essay published in 2000, Elisabeth Krimmer, a contributor to the present vo lume,wrote: 'The idea of having to combine Cultural Studies and Goethe's Weimar is enough tomake a scholar's hair stand on end [. . .]. For everything Cultural Stu dies stands for seems to be blatantly contradicted by everything eighteenth-century Weimar has come to symbolize.' Weimar stands, she argues, for the autonomy of high culture, while Cultural Studies views it as embedded in a whole way of life, in away thatmakes thedifferentiation of high and low culture redundant.Weimar also stands for theuniversally human as a 'transhistorical essence', whereas Cultural Stu dies views human nature as particular, constructed, and fluid. Indeed, the very term 'Weimar Classicism' has to be viewed less as a descriptive term than as an ideologi cal slogan, and some literaryhistorians thereforeprefer to use neutral labels such as 'German literature in the age of theFrench Revolution'. It is thus interesting to come upon the latestvolume of theexcellent Camden House History ofGerman Literature. The titleunashamedly cites the traditional term 'Weimar Classicism', but the editor, Simon Richter, declares he has adopted themethods ofCultural Studies to produce thevolume. Either Krimmer iswrong, or else Richter has attempted the impossible. Richter, who contributed to two rather cheeky volumes that approached Weimar in the spirit of Cultural Studies-Outing Goethe and his Age, ed. by Alice Kuzniar (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, I996), and Unwrapping Goethe's Weimar, ed. byBurkhard Henke, Susanne Kord, and Richter (Rochester, NY: Camden House, 2000)-comes well qualified for thisnew challenge. (The lattervolume included the essay 'Sartorial Transgressions' by Krimmer, quoted above.) In his stimulating in troduction he gives an overview ofwhat the new methodology might mean for such an apparently inappropriate subject-matter.Making a virtue of necessity, he concedes right away that the concept ofWeimar Classicism is controversial. Defining it as a 'cultural phenomenon' (p. 4) rather than a period ormovement, he argues thatpre cisely itsproblematic nature makes it a suitable case foramethodology that 'reveals thehybridity inmonolithic institutions': 'The approach taken in thisvolume [. . .] is designed to display Weimar Classicism's variety, itscontradictions and inconsisten cies, itsstrengths and weaknesses, its multiple voices and contrary ends. The fact that we cannot say precisely what a Classical text might be [. . .] isnot a cause forconcern, but rather recognition and acknowledgement of the striving ambition of theClassical project' (pp. 39-40). Do Richter's contributors succeed in realizing thisprogramme? It should be said at once that he has assembled a distinguished team, with a judicious mixture of Germans and non-Germans and of veterans and relative newcomers, and that their contributions are not only at a high academic level but are ingeneral also lively and readable. Covering the threemajor genres, JaneBrown writes on drama and theatre, R. H. Stephenson on the novel, and Cyrus Hamlin on poetry. Benjamin Bennett offersa sceptical view of thenew philosophy of aesthetics and its influence on literary practice, and Daniel Wilson writes (with his customary disenchantment) about the political context and message of themovement. Dieter Borchmeyer and Charles A. Grair write respectively on the idea of the classical and on the influence of antiquity. The centrality of theGoethe-Schiller correspondence is recognized in an essay by Gail Hart, and Astrida Orle Tantillo assesses the sense inwhich Goethe's scientific views can be called classical. Helmut Pfotenhauer writes well about the role of the visual in Weimar culture. Finally, and atmore distance from theGoethe-Schiller axis, Thomas Saine appraises the role of the laterHerder, and Elisabeth Krimmer deals with women writers. MLR, I02.2, 2007 559 Ithas tobe said that,based simply on the fairlyconventional range of topics covered in the volume, Weimar Classicism seems to have won the tug-of-warwith Cultural Studies. The two earlier volumes mentioned above contained essays on themost varied subjects: tourism, sexual orientation, physical deformity, to name but three. The formatof a literaryhistory seems tohave largelyprecluded this freewheeling ap proach. Of the twentycontributors to the earlier volumes, only twobesides the editor (Krimmer andWilson) reappear here...
Referência(s)