Notes on Arthur Schnitzler’s Literary Technique

NotesThe edition used throughout this paper is that of S. Fischer (Berlin, 1922), presenting four volumes of Erzählende Schriften and five of Theaterstücke. The edition is by no means final. Under the title Die Erwachenden S. Fischer added another volume of prose in 1928 (containing Fräulein Else, Die Frau des Richters, Traumnovelle). Spiel im Morgengrauen (1926), Therese (1928), Flucht in die Finsternis, and Aben-teurernovelle (1937) were published by S. Fischer as separate volumes, as were the plays Der Reigen (printed privately in 1896, published in 1931), Komödie der Verführung (1924), Der Gang zum Weiher (1926), and Im Spiel der Sommerlüfte (1929). Phaidon published Buch der Sprüche und Bedenken in 1927 and Berman-Fischer Über Krieg und Frieden (Stockholm, 1939). Two one-act plays of the Anatol cycle, not included in the Fischer edition, were published as manuscripts by Fischer; Anatols Größenwahn and Die Mörderin (both in Berlin, 1932); they were not available.Some typical samples may be found in Otto P. Schinnerer’s “The History of Arthur Schnitzler’s Reigen,” PMLA, XLVI (1931), 839 ff. Both Richard Specht, Arthur Schnitzler: der Dichter und Sein Werk (Berlin, 1922) und Joseph Körner, Arthur Schnitzler’s Gestalten und Probleme (Wien, Zürich, Leipzig, 1921) mention earlier representatives. A detailed enumeration would lead us too far here. See also Fritz Gross,” A. Schnitzler,” Contemporary Review, CLI (May, 1937), 607 ff., and F. Egloff’s review of Frau Beate in The Saturday Review of Literature, May 15, 1926.H. S. Reiss, “The Problems of Fate and Religion in the Work of Arthur Schnitzler,” Modern Language Review, XL (1945), 300 ff.Reiss, op. cit., pp. 307–8.Not only Specht, op. cit.,and Körner, op. cit., but many minor essayists have harped on the “Old Vienna” theme.Ashley Dukes, Modern Dramatists (London: W. Palmer, 1911), p. 152.A. W. S. Randall, The Saturday Review of Literature, June 11, 1932.It might be worthwhile to examine the similarities between Schnitzler’s comedies and Noel Coward’s dialogue pieces, British as they may seem, and furthermore trace the influence of Schnitzler’s style in Ferencz Molnar’s plays and those of his American counterpart and, perhaps, pupil, S. N. Behrman. Equally interesting might be a study of the influence Maupassant’s stories had on those of Schnitzler: even a superficial survey will show surprising analogies of themes and construction.Though we are going to discuss the contributions of both authors later, it should be mentioned that both arrive at an objective appraisal of Schnitzler’s ethics. Cf. Sol Liptzin, Arthur Schnitzler (New York: Prentice-Hall, 1932), pp. 97-99, 210 ff.; O. P. Schinnerer, op. cit.Selma Koehler, “The Question of Moral Responsibility in Arthur Schnitzler’s Dramatic Works,” Journal of English and Germanic Philology, XXII (1923), 376 ff. Der Rei gen, Komödie der Verführung, Der Gang zum Weiher, Im Spiel der Sommerlüfte appeared after the publication of her paper.Frida Ilmer, “Schnitzler’s Attitudes with Regard to the Transcendental,” Germanic Review, X (1935), 114 ff. lt is regrettable that her dissertation, “Die Gestalt des Künstlers bei Schnitzler” (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins, 1933) exists only as a manuscript and could not be consulted by this writer.Friedrich Wilhelm Kaufmann, “Zur Frage der Wertung in Arthur Schnitzler’s Werk,” PM LA, XLVIII (1933), 209 ff.Hans Naumann, Deutsche Dichtung der Gegenwart (Stuttgart: I. B. Metzler, 1930), as quoted by Professor Kaufmann, op. cit.The relation between Schnitzler’s stream-of-consciousness-method and that of James Joyce, whose writings present similar difficulties to the abstract ethical approach, has been pointed out by Werner Neuse in his paper, “'Erlebte Rede’ und ‘Innerer Monolog’ in den Erzählenden Schriften Arthur Schnitzler's” PMLA, XLIX (1934), 327 ff.Otto P. Schinnerer, “The Early Works of Arthur Schnitzler,” Germanic Review, IV (1929), 153 ff.; Otto P. Schinnerer, “The Literary Apprenticeshipof Arthur Schnitzler,” Germanic Review, V (1929), 38 ff.; Otto f’. Schinnerer, “Arthur Schnitzler’s Nachlaß,” Germanic Review, VIII (1933), 114 ff. The first two papers were again used for his introduction to Schnitzler’s Die Kleine Komödie (Berlin: S. Fischer, 1932).Sol Liptzin, “The Genesis of Arthur Schnitzler’s Das weite Land,” PMLA, XLVI (1931), 860 ff.; Sol Liptzin, “The Genesis of Arthur Schnitzler’s Professor Bernhardi, Philological Quarterly, X (1931), 348 ff.; Sol Liptzin, “The Genesis of Arthur Schnitzler’s Der einsame Weg,” Journal of English and Germanic Philology, XXX (1931), 348 ff.; Arthur Schnitzler, op. cit. Since the book contains the essence of the articles we are going to quote from the book wherever necessary.Op. cit., pp. 100–30.Ibid., pp. 175–95.Ibid., pp. 154–74.Ibid., pp. 131–53.Ibid., pp. 220–25.Specht, op. cit., and Körner, op. cit., Georgette Boner, Arthur Schnitzler’s Frauengestalten, Dissertation, Zürich, 1930.Op. cit., pp. 26–46.To find an English equivalent of the German Umbruch is not easy. This article uses several expressions which together, it is hoped, come as close to the original meaning as possible.It is interesting to note that even such Schnitzler “apologists” as Specht, Körner, and Boner consider Geronimo as something alien in Schnitzler’s work because it does not deal with sex.In my dissertation, Arthur Schnitzler als Erzähler (Basel, 1935), I tried to make clear the function of the ” turnabout .” I also emphasized that the erotic element was not essential in some of bis most successful productions. While today I still believe that Umbruch is bis favorite device (if possible occurring in a constellation of some sort of deception), a rereading of Schnitzler’s works forces me to admit that many of bis characters are indeed obsessed by a drive for erotic adventures to the exclusion of other pursuits.Max Quadt, “Arthur Schnitzler als Erzähler,” Germanic Review, III (1928), 34 ff., asserts the opposite. He finds no unerhörte Begebenheit, no surprises in Schnitzler’s stories and complains that the persons of bis plays don’t “act.” This misunderstanding can be explained by Schnitzler’s initially lyrical and, later, impressionist style which covers the skeletons of bis plots with a smooth, soft finish.A similar ironical twist occurs in the last act of Der Junge Medardus.The German expression Betrug means not only deceit, betrayal, or fraudulent behavior, it also comprises infidelity and, more specifically, adultery.Albertus, in Zwischenspiel, says to Amadeus: “... den der zu leben weiß, erwarten alle Abenteuer nach denen ihn gelüstet, im Frieden seines Heims. Er erlebt sie geradeso wie ein anderer, aber ohne Zeitverschwendung, ohne Unannehmlichkeiten, ohne Gefahr; und wenn er Phantasie hat, bringt ihm seine Gattin, ohne daß sie es ahnt, lauter uneheliche Kinder zur Welt.” —Theaterstücke, III, 116.Werner Neuse, op. cit., has made a beginning of a stylistic analysis but is mainly concerned with one feature, the author’s usage of erlebte Rede and innerer Monolog. Unfortunately the dissertation of Professor Bernhard Blume, “Der Prosa Stil Arthur Schnitzlers” (1935) was not available through the Ohio State University Library.In this, as in almost all other stories, Schnitzler’s method excludes a taking of position. That is why the students of his ethical tenets have had such a difficult time. In Flucht in die Finsternis, the persecution mania of Robert, who is clearly a psychiatric case, is made as understandable as Casanova’s satyriasis which, in Casanovas Heimfahrt, leads the aging liar to the seduction of a very young girl. Casanova is not a “case” like Robert, but Schnitzler depicts Casanova’s irresponsibility in the same detached fashion. Casanova himself confesses remorse, but since he is presented as someone who lies even to himself, the value of his remorse remains somewhat doubtful.This furnishes the plot for the legend, Die Hirtenflöte, often classified as being outside of Schnitzler’s scope. The fear of Dionysia’s possible adultery makes Erasmus drive her away into the world. When the possible infidelities have become reality, when she has everything behind her instead of, perhaps, before her, she may come back.The most striking examples of this are: Fridolin in Traumnovelle who, unsure of his wife’s faithfulness, decides to deceive her in order to have an advantage over her. Or Genia in Das weite Land, who betrays Hofreiterout of defiance or revenge, whereby the plotter Schnitzler ruins the psychologist Schnitzler. For Frau Genia is a paragon of maternal gentleness and her act of revenge is completely out of key with her character.Theaterstücke, V, 467.Ibid., p. 488.Ibid ., p. 493.Ibid., p. 509.Cf. Körner, op. cit., and F. Egloff’s review of Beate, Saturday Review of Literature, loc. cit.Theaterstücke, II, 32.To quote only two examples of the many tobe found: In Episode (Theaterstücke, I, 45) Anatol remarks: “Das Episodenhafte der Geschichte kam mir so deutlich zum Bewußtsein. Während ich den warmen Hauch ihres Mundes auf meiner Hand fühlte, erlebte ich das Ganze schon in der Erinnerung. Es war eigentlich schon vorüber.” And Sylvester Thorn in Der Gang zum Weiher (ibid., p. 62): “Was ist Erinnerung? Zwischen Nichts und Etwas / Ein Ungestaltes, Nie-zu-Fassendes; Und so wie Ufersand von Meereswellen / Von neuen Lebensfluten stets bedroht.”Oskar Seidlin has edited Schnitzler’s correspondence with Otto Brahm; Kurt Bergel that with Georg Brandes. Herbert Steiner, with Kurt Bergel, has also started work on the correspondence between Hofmannsthal and Schnitzler. None of these books have been published

Art · Literature · German Literature and Culture Studies · History · Literature and Cultural Memory · Philosophy