381a1a487e8b6d694b2c686fc08e3b8d

The Tragedy of Die Jdin von Toledo Author(s): Roy C. Cowen Source: The German Quarterly, Vol.
37, No. 1 (Jan., 1964), pp. 39-53 Published by: Wiley on behalf of the American Association of Teachers of German Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/402734 . Accessed: 28/09/2013 10:59
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Wiley and American Association of Teachers of German are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The German Quarterly.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 128.250.144.144 on Sat, 28 Sep 2013 10:59:06 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
THE TRAGEDY OF DIE JUDIN VON TOLEDO Roy C. Cowen Of all the plays Grillparzer wrote, Die Jiidin von Toledo has proved to be one of the most difficult to understand.1A review of the critical history of this drama indicates that the main difficulty lies in the determination of the central figure, the nature of his tragic experience and, in some cases where the designation of "tragedy" is questioned, the genre of the work. In the years immediately following its emergence from Grillparzer's Nachla3, the Jiidin was understood as the tragedy of the title-heroine. In 1888, however, Johannes Volkelt introduced a new perspective which made the King the central figure.2 For the next fifty years the interpretation of the play as an Erziehungsdrama portraying Alfonso's education by experience as well as theory to his royal station and mission remained virtually unquestioned.3 Although Rahel continued to excite the imagination of many critics, her name as the title of the drama was interpreted in the sense of "The Episode of the Jewess of Toledo". The first major break with Volkelt's interpretation came in 1938, when Harold F. H. Lenz published Franz Grillparzer'sPolitical Ideas and "Die Jiidin von Toledo".4 The second part of the book consists of a detailed examination of the Jiidin, which concentrates on showing how untenable Volkelt's position is, if Grillparzer's representation of the court and the King is examined carefully. It might be noted here, however, that the interpretation of the Jiidin as Erziehungsdrama continued to occupy a place of honor even in such modern treatments as Benno von Wiese's Deutsche Tragodie von Lessing bis Hebbel.5 In
1All
4 (New York, 1938).
textual references are from Franz Grillparzer:S<mtliche Werke, ed. August Sauer (Vienna, 1909 ff.). The text of Die Jiidin von Toledo is found in the 1. Abteilung, 7. Band, pp. 1-105. Franz Grillparzer als Dichter des Tragischen (Nordlingen, 1888), p. 22ff. Although the word Erziehungsdramais totally in accordancewith Volkelt's interpretation,the designation was first applied by Alfred von Berger in Dramaturgische Vortrdge (Vienna, 1890).
3rd ed. (Hamburg, 1955), 440-447. 39
40
THE GERMAN QUARTERLY
some cases, the persistence of Volkelt's interpretation may simply be due to unfamiliarity with Lenz's work, which was published privately and does not appear, for example, in von Wiese's copious bibliographical references. By means of a detailed, convincing analysis of its representatives, Lenz demonstrates that the court is marked by hypocrisy and spiritual emptiness. If its moral standards are presented by the playwright in such consistently bad light as Grillparzer has done here, such a court, and the political order represented by it, Lenz contends, can scarcely serve as a positive value or desirable goal in an Erziehungsdrama. Human understanding is totally lacking in the Queen, Manrique and Garceran, who, for example, is "nothing but an opportunist, drawn by the poet with delightful and devastating irony" as well as a "thorough hypocrite" (Lenz, p. 60). In this atmosphere of hypocrisy and conformity, only Alfonso appears as an individual with tolerance and human understanding. In Lenz's opinion, the tragedy is constructed on the loss of Alfonso's individualism, for, when Alfonso acquiesces in Act V to the action of the nobles, he becomes a part of the court and its convention. The end of the drama is a triumph of the state at the cost of all individual feelings for humanity. In light of the overwhelming evidence presented against it, the concept of a desirable and laudible order can no longer be applied to the court around Alfonso. Lenz is admittedly concerned mainly with "Grillparzer'sPolitical Ideas", and he does a thorough job of interpreting them. But the Jiidin bears the designation of a "tragedy" and, as such, is not completely understandable by Lenz's interpretation alone. Although he never really goes into the question of the genre. Lenz seems to see the "tragedy" in the "broken" figure of the King, who has lost his individuality and succumbed to the morality of the court. But in speaking of Alfonso's individuality, Lenz says: "It is lost because a conscious understanding of and catharsis from, his error does not occur." (p. 68). Alfonso does not even realize that he is losing his individuality, the one quality which raises him above the members of his court. The King may, from the standpoint of the audience, seem pitiable or pathetic, but the very qualities he is missing, "conscious understanding"and "catharsis", are necessary for a tragic figure. That is to say, experience must be of enduring quality,
THE TRAGEDY OF DIE JuDIN
VON TOLEDO
41
if a character is to be called a "tragic hero". If Lenz's observation is correct, namely that the King does not really feel remorse or true guilt, then Alfonso's attitude toward his experience with Rahel prohibits his being considered tragic. Volkelt avoids any problems of tragedy by suggesting in a footnote that the play should be called just that, a "Schauspiel", because the designation "tragedy" is not applicable (p. 200 f.). It must be noted, however, that Lope de Vega designated his Las Paces de los Reyes, Grillparzer's main source for the Jiidin, as a "Comedia", a designation which would perhaps best be reproduced with "Schauspiel"; yet Grillparzer decided against using any form of "Comedia" or "Schauspiel" for his drama. It is my contention that the original designation, "HistorischesTrauerspiel", cannot be discarded until the drama has been examined thoroughly as a "tragedy". Until now, however, I have concentrated on Alfonso, as have most of the critics of the Jiidin since Volkelt. It has already been noted that the first criticism centered around Rahel. Since Alfonso is obviously not a tragic figure, it now becomes apparent that a closer examination of Rahel as the central figure must be made. Because Volkelt was the first one to dismiss her as the heroine of the piece, his reasons should be reviewed:
Wenn auf das Tragische in der Jiidin niiher eingegangen werden soll, so muB zunichst dariiber Klarheit herrschen, dabf nicht, wie der Titel vermuten liiat, Rahel, sondern der Konig Alfonso Mittelpunkt und Held des Dramas ist. Nicht nur bestimmt der K6nig weit mehr als Rahel den Fortgang der Handlung und bildet mehr als sie den Beziehungspunkt fur alles, was im Stiick geschieht; sondern es tritt auch sein Wollen, Kiimpfen und Leiden, seine Schuld und Siihne mit ganz anderm inneren Gewicht auf, als dies bei Rahel der Fall ist. So sehr auch diese durch ihr auffallendes Wesen das Interesse des Lesers in den ersten Akten fesselt und insofern den Konig verdunkelt, so kann doch das spielerische Kind, an dem alles Oberfiiche ist, den tiefsinnenden und klarbewuBt handelnden Konig nicht aus dem Einheitspunkt der Handlung verdriingen. (p. 25 f.) Volkelt rejects Rahel as the heroine mainly because of her "lightness" and "childishness"; she seems to him to be too "superficial". It is, however, equally apparent that Alfonso, by succumbing to convention, fails to attain the depth of character which an assertion of his indi-
42
viduality would have brought about. Any depth in his character is furthermore belied by the fact that he never manifests any emotion of sustained intensity, such as love, hate, ambition or religious fervor. Volkelt, in the above quotation, contrasts with Rahel "den tiefsinnenden und klarbewu3t handelnden K6nig", but Alfonso is anything but consistent and contemplative in his actions. Alfonso's attraction to Rahel and his later revulsion are the results of seeing her; while the attraction to her on the basis of one glimpse of her beauty is understandable, the repudiation of her upon seeing her corpse is an impulsive action which takes place without any inner conflict. Likewise, his decision to abdicate and go on the crusade comes as a sudden reversal of his previous action; although the end of the play is anticipated by several allusions to and discussions of the impending war against the Moors, there is no evidence that Alfonso arrives at his decision to go on the crusade because of inner conviction. He seems to be reaching for a quick way out of his situation, an easy way to avoid the tragic dilemma of punishing the nobles or himself. As a matter of fact, his doing penance by the crusade is put in a questionable light by Esther in lines 1921-1942: Siehst du, sie sind schon heiter und vergniigt Und stiften Ehen fur die Zukunft schon. Sie sind die GroBen,haben zum Versihnungsfest Ein Opfer sich geschlachtet aus den Kleinen Und reichen sich die annoch blut'ge Hand. (1921-25) His action simply does not seem convincing either from the perspective of his own personality or from the situation. Because of his apparent intentions, he is "Alfonso der Edle", but his ignorance of the problematic aspects of his actions deprives him of the title "Alfonso der GroBe". The lack of solitary greatness is not in itself prohibitive of a tragic figure. But when it is combined with a lack of intense emotional bonds and an inability to judge oneself and one's companions, e.g., his unjustified confidence in Garceran's judgment, this lack of inner greatness becomes synonymous with lack of tragic stature. Although it may put an unjust demand on the poet, there is usually a feeling in the viewers of a tragedy that, when the tragic hero is a King, his suffering must manifest greater breadth and intensity than that of any other tragic hero. In any case, Alfonso is pitiable - but not tragic. The preceding argument has, I believe, demonstrated that the
THE TRAGEDY OF DIE JUDIN VON TOLEDO
43
very "superficiality" which Volkelt used as a criterion to exclude Rahel as a tragic figure is characteristic of Alfonso. But the correctness of Volkelt's analysis of the Jewess still remains to be examined. First of all, I must point out that some scholars who follow the main lines of Volkelt's interpretation may also concede the tragic stature of Rahel.6 There is, of course, one notable circumstance which seems, at first glance, to argue against Rahel as the central figure, namely, that she only appears in the first three acts.7 Beside the fact that her murder does not take place until the beginning of Act V (v. the opening lines spoken off stage), one must above all note that she dominates the first three acts by force of her personality. She dominates them so completely that the success or failure of a performance can depend on the actress playing her role; as a matter of fact, one of the main objections to the first production of the play was the miscasting of Frl. Wolter as Rahel.8 This attention to the casting of the role of Rahel, however, is not surprising in light of the obvious and lavish care of the poet in the development of this character (Grillparzer himself called her his "Rose von Toledo"). In terms of stage effect, Rahel is one of Grillparzer's most successful creations. Then what kind of person is Rahel? Most critical descriptions of her have the following terms in common: "kindisch", "kokett", "verbuhlt", "spielerisch", "sinnlich", "amoralisch". Yet these adjectives do not accompany a direct moral evaluation of her, because almost
6
1938): "Durch ihre Liebe zu Alfonso wird Rahel zur tragischen Gestalt, durch ihre schillernd unberechenbare Naturhaftigkeit interessiert und gewinnt sie, wo egoistische Gemeinheit nur anekeln konnte" (264). Cf., however, "'Die Jiidin von Toledo' ist ein Erziehungsdrama" (276). 7 This argument is used by Dorothy Lasher-Schlitt in Grillparzer's Attitude toward the Jews (New York, 1936) to prove that Rahel is only a "foil to the unfolding of the story of King Alphons" (p. 80). 8 For example, Ludwig Speidel in his review for the Neue Freie he also asks the decisive question: "Aber diese Rolle, aus der dieses Stiick besteht, wer soil sie spielen in Wien?" For him, the play existed only in the role of Rahel.
For example, Emil Reich, Grillparzers dramatisches Werk (Vienna,
Presse (Morgenblatt)of January 23, 1873 (reprintedin the Apparat, 1. Abteilung, 21. Band), not only criticizes the choice of Frl. Wolter;
44
THE GERMANQUARTERLY
all critics agree that she is not to be judged by ordinary moral standards. Certainly in the beginning she recognizes virtually no morality herself, nor is she condemned by anyone whose word is impartial. Because the Queen is selfrighteous, narrow-minded, intolerant and jealous, and Garceran can only recognize one side of Rahel, their opinions about her have only the limited value in keeping with their personalities and interests. The King, on the other hand, is supposed to be objective in his judgments. He calls her an "albern spielend, toricht-weises Kind" (1029), the personification of all the "Fehler dieser weiten Erde, die Torheit und die Eitelkeit, die Schwache, die List, den Trost, Gefallsucht, ja die Habsucht" (1456-58), and he describes her appearance as "Ein b6ser Zug um Wange, Kinn und Mund, ein lauernd Etwas in dem Feuerblick vergiftete, entstellte ihre Schbnheit" (1849-51). But Alfonso also contradicts himself when he praises her beauty (1478-83), calls her "die Wahrheit, ob verzerrt" and says "All was sie tat, ging aus ihrem Selbst, urplotzlich, unverhofft und ohne Beispiel" (1685-87). Even Esther says to Alfonso: "Ihr schlagt zu hoch sie an" (1676). After so many contradictory and distorted evaluations and descriptions of Rahel, what should one believe? Most studies which do not conveniently avoid the question concede that Rahel really falls in love with the King. Yet the "childish", self-indulgent girl described by Volkelt and others would almost necessarily be incapable of true love for the King - unless she underwent a basic change. Rahel's entire character seems to be marked by change, from one mood to another, from one pose to another, and certainly in the first two acts there does not appear to be any solid foundation underlying this constant flux. The continued attempt to describe her basic nature as demonic, in my opinion, considers impressive actions as expressive. Rahel, like Medea, is constantly associated with magic, yet unlike Medea, Rahel never seriously "practices" magic or indulges in any ritual before our eyes; the one scene, lines 586 ff., which could be seen in terms of witchcraft belies by its levity any serious implications of magic. For the characters on the stage, Rahel's words and actions seem, as if by magic, to produce the impression of a seductive demon, but such words and actions are self-contradictory. They are too self-contradictory to be viewed as expressions of any one quality, let alone one of demonic proportions. In the first two acts she is truly a child of nature whose actions seem
45
frivolous because there is no single motivation or principle determining them. She is the picture of life, which loves action for its own sake. Rahel cannot be restrained from doing something, even if the later action contradicts an earlier one completely. Almost all previous descriptions of her character also imply validity for all stages of her life, as if there were no development in the three acts in which she appears.9 Obviously, Rahel still demonstrates in Act III many of the characteristics she showed in I and II. But no one would maintain that an inner change in a person must be immediately recognizable to those around him (it has already been shown that the remarks of the other characters about her do not produce any definite pattern). An often overlooked possibility for the playwright to show change is the meaningful contrast of similar events and actions. The recent research on Grillparzer has done much on the visual aspects of his dramas, particularly the use of gesture, but the research on the Jiidin has generally been limited to the use of stage symbols.10It must not be forgotten, however, that one is dealing here with a play of great complexity. For example, Mettin, in characterizing the exposition, speaks of "Durchdachtheit, die durch eine natiirliche Lebensfiille verhiillt wird".11 The emphasis on "Durchdachtheit" is, moreover, only an echo from the first reviews of the play which often regretted the intellectualism of the work.l2 Yet surprisingly enough, 9 One notable exceptionis Francis Wolf-Cirianin GrillparzersFrauengestalten (Stuttgart and Berlin, 1907), who discusses Rahel's character and its changes act by act. Unfortunately, however,WolfCirian is not able to coordinate several good observations into a penetrating analysis; he never deviates greatly from his original interpretation of Rahel as a "Dime". 10 One outstanding contribution to our understanding of the visual aspects of Grillparzer's dramas is Walter Naumann's "Die Form des Dramas bei Grillparzer und Hofmannsthal" DVLG XXXIII (1959), 20-38, in which Naumann speaks of a "Konfigurationder Gestalten". It is hoped that the present investigation will help to establish the Jiidin in the framework of the modern approach to Grillparzer as exemplified by Naumann. 11 Hermann Christian Mettin, Grillparzer: Dramaturgische Essays (Berlin, 1943), p. 147. 12 For example, H. Gr. in Die Presse of November24, 1872 (reprinted as No. 53 in the Apparat, p. 329 ff.).
46
THE GERMANQUARTERLY
virtually all of the criticism of the Jiidin has been psychological, not structural (even the stage symbols have been interpreted psychologically). Since the psychological approach has obviously produced inadequate results, an attempt will now be made to answer some of the previously unanswered questions by studying the structural implications of Rahel's actions. An examination of the progression of time in Die Jiidin von Toledo shows that Act II follows almost without interruption Act I, and Acts III, IV and V also take place on the same day. It is, on the other hand, quite obvious at the beginning of Act III that a considerable span of time has transpired since the end of Act II. Isaak has, by the beginning of Act III, thoroughly embedded himself in the system of the state and is exploiting his position to the fullest. The explanation for his position of favoritism is given by Isaak himself: "Mein Rahelchen steigt taglich in der Gunst" (850). But this remark seems, when examined closely, to imply that Rahel has not yet reached the zenith of her influence; Isaak says that she "steigt taglich", not, for example, "steht schon fest". For Isaak her star is still in ascent. A promise of even greater things is implied in his smile: Hort ihr? Da kommen sie mit Zimbeln und Posaunen Wie Ahasverus mit dem Weibe Esther, Die unser Volk zu Glanz und Ruhm erh6ht. (873-75) Although there is the pun on Rahel's sister's name, the primary allusion is to Esther of the Bible, who is commonly a symbol of a woman who becomes the power behind the throne as well as a symbol for the Jews of a deliverer. But the arrival of Alfonso and Rahel presents a sharp contrast to Isaak's picture of the situation. Instead of a passionate or obsessed lover, Alfonso seems to be a man who has already grown tired of his mistress. He still uses aphoristic expressions typical of "Schulweisheiten" and lacking emotional intensity: "Die Furcht ist Weiberrecht, doch ihr mil3braucht's" (888). And he seems short-tempered: "Legt einen Teppich ihr und macht ein Ende" (893). If Isaak's remark about her still climbing in the King's favor is accepted at face value - and there is no reason to doubt the honesty of Isaak's opinion then it can be assumed that the present situation in no way signifies a regression in the affair, and that there has never been a mature feeling of love by the King in the intervening time. Rahel has been his mistress, but there has been no intensification of the emotional
47
bond between them - at least, as far as the King is concerned. The reason that Grillparzer does not show any love scenes is not, as many critics have suggested, that he is reluctant to present intense emotions on the stage; there is simply no deep-seated, mutual love to be shown, and a display of passion or mere sexual attraction would be superfluous and even misleading. The effect of the events during the time between II and III is reflected primarily in the language of the two main characters. It has already been noted that the language of Alfonso has remained the same in Act III. But a new tone comes into Rahel's speech, when she says: Ich habe nie geliebt. Doch konnt' ich lieben. Wenn ich in einer Brust den Wahnsinn trafe Der mich erfiillte, wair'mein Herz beriihrt. Bis dahin mach' ich die Gebriiuchemit, Die hergebracht im Gotzendienst der Liebe, Wie man in fremden Tempeln etwa kniet. (957-62) Nowhere in her previous speeches can comparable imagery be found. Even in such extended and colorful speeches as, for example, 571 ff., Rahel speaks only of the things at hand or of things about which she has been told. The image in 960-962 is, on the other hand, the result of a self-evaluation that has been unknown in her up to now; although she has spoken of her life, ambition and beauty, she has never evaluated her own actions or situation. The note of resignation in her speech is likewise totally new. As if to underline this change in herself, Rahel says in conclusion: "Ich will indes nur schlafen bis sie kommt, / Bin ich doch selbst ein Traum nur einer Nacht." (97879) There is no image in any of her previous speeches which even approaches this one in depth and sobriety. The importance of this image is further emphasized by the fact that the life-as-dream motif plays a significant role in most of Grillparzer's dramas. And it is Rahel herself who brings out this motif here. If the change in her language and thought has been established, the subsequent episode with the armor can be interpreted in its proper light.13 It is remarkable that no one has attributed any im13
Wolf-Cirian (see footnote 9) makes the following observation about the scene with the helmet: "So setzt sie denn, in ihrem Spiele fortfahrend, den Helm auf. und ihre Phantasie, die spielerische Phantasie eines mit einem Tropfen Kiinstlertum bernadeten Naturells, bemaichtigtsich sofort der neuen Rolle" (p. 300). The conclusions drawn from this observation remain, however, superficial,
48
portance to two facts: that Rahel dons a "costume" in two scenes, 558 ff. and 999 ff.; that there is, however, an inherent difference between the two "masquerades". As has already been noted, most critics have characterized Rahel as "kokett". Her coquetry is usually considered accidental: "Um Alfonso zu bezaubern, braucht sie aber der Kiinste nicht viele. Grillparzers Rahel ist ein kokettes Wesen, eine Art Philine; die Koketterie ist aber natiirlich, angeboren."14 Farinelli's observation is, by and large, correct. The Rahel of the first two acts behaves impulsively and often without motivation, yet her actions often convey the impression of calculation and coquetry. In her masquerade as the Queen, Grillparzer goes to great lengths to make it evident that her coquetry is largely involuntary. It seems almost as if Rahel is consciously ridiculing the Queen, her "rival", in order to make her ridiculous in the King's eyes. Since a similar scene could have been planned especially for the King and would thereby indicate a calculating woman, Grillparzer strongly emphasizes the spontaneous origin of her masquerade, as well as the accidental arrival of the King. Rahel's masquerade is intended only for herself; the effect on Alfonso shows the effect which she can provoke without being aware of it. "Natural coquetry" implies a virtually innocent intention which leads to a seemingly calculated action. The first masquerade is truly the product of "natural coquetry". But what about the "masquerade" with the helmet in Act III? Here the masquerade, like the flirtation with Garceran, is the action of a woman calculating the effect. Rahel has come to the realization that she is "ein Traum nur einer Nacht" and is now striving to hold onto her fleeting happiness. In Acts I and II, Rahel is the incorporation of "life", which knows no ulterior motives and which remains only partially understood by those who think in terms of effect, e.g., Garceran or Eleonore. In Act III, however, Rahel has left the realm of "pure", unmotivated life. Her actions are now the products of calculation and recognition of her situation. When the King leaves the stage in Act III, Rahel's speeches are shortened to poignant brevity: "Er liebt mich nicht, ich hab' es lingst gewuBt." (1095) - "Er war so heif und feurig im Beginn,"
14
Arturo Farinelli, Grillparzer und Lope de Vega (Berlin, 1894),
p. 156,
49
(1099) - "Was aber wird aus mir, die ich vertraut? / Laf uns entfliehn!" (1101-02) Line 1101 expresses Rahel's tragedy. In this line she summarizes the problematic side of her existence: she has always acted with trust and confidence in everything and everybody. She has shown a natural trust in life which approaches childlike naivete. She has trusted love, but it has failed her. She has trusted her charm, but it has also failed her. She has trusted the King, but she feels he has left her to an imminent death. Rahel is childlike in her ability to trust life and people, in her naive acceptance of everything as it seems to be. The final line of Act III, "Und hab' ihn, Schwester, wahrhaft doch geliebt", represents, at least in part, a positive solution. Her ability to feel true love is the fruition of the trust which is leading to her tragic end; yet it is also the final proof of her maturity.'5 Regarding lines 1104 ff., the following comment is made in Sauer's notes to the critical text: "Das sprunghafte, launenhafte Wesen Rahels, das von einem Gegensatz zum anderen iiberspringt, erinnert an den Charakter Kleopatras in Shakespeares 'Antonius und Kleopatra'." (p. 201) This assertion presupposes, however, that Rahel's attention to the amethyst is genuine. But the stage directions call for her to ask about the necklace "mit von Schluchzen unterbrochener Stimme". She does not take the necklace, but only uses it as the subject of obvious Galgenhumor: Ich will es gar nicht sehn. Nur spaiter etwa Wenn unsre Haft sich dehnt zu langrer Zeit,
15 Frederic E. Coenen, in Franz Grillparzer's Portraiture of Men, University of North Carolina Studies in the Germanic Languages and Literatures 4 (Chapel Hill, 1951), questions whether "Grillparzer's end of Die Jiidin von Toledo represents a gloomy pessimism" (p. 99 f.), a view which he claims has been gaining ground since the twenties of this century. Coenen tries to refute any "pessimism" by a positive interpretation of Alfonso, Manrique and Garceran, an interpretation which seems somewhat too conventional. It is not one of the male characters, but rather Rahel, who, by the maturation process of recognizing her love, belies complete pessimism. The present investigation is not intended, of course, to refute Coenen's main contention that Grillparzer was just as skilful in the portraiture of men as women; as a matter of fact, the present interpretation depends on and therefore emphasizes Grillparzer's subtle presentation of all the characters.
50
THE GERMANQUARTERLY
Zerstreuung heischt das ew'ge Einerlei, Versuch' ich es, und schmiickemich zum Tod. (1112-15) Her macabre joke is not just a Gedankensprung; it is a commentary on her previous life and values. In Act I (lines 315 ff.) she offered the King her jewelry for protection, but now she has no thought of saving her life with the jewelry. The mention of the necklace, like the masquerade with the helmet, can only be understood by reference to a similar event in an earlier act. In Act III, Rahel has resigned herself to her fate and does not, as in 315 ff., think of buying her life. The interpretation of Rahel's tragedy in terms of a lost trust, moreover, recalls a motif present even in some of Grillparzer'searliest tragedies. Sappho makes "Undank" the worst of vices, when she says: . . Die andern Laster alle Hyanen, Lowen, Tiger, Wolfe sind's, Der Undank ist die Schlange! Nicht? Die Schlange!
So schon, so glatt, so bunt, so giftig! Oh (1294-97)
The word "Undank" occurs even more often in Das goldene VlieB, where it is descriptive of the tragedy stemming from Medea's misplaced trust and love. Thus, Grillparzer is not only interested in the tragedy of a person obligated by a trust, as for example Bancbanus or Hero; he also sees the implications of a trust from the side of the person who trusts another. It is the latter, and previously neglected side of a trust which furnishes the basis for the tragedy of the Jiidin von Toledo. But the tragedy of misplaced trust does not end with Rahel's death. Although her question, "Was aber wird aus mir, die ich vertraut?", has been answered, Rahel's tragic experience continues to impress itself on the drama. The tragic theme of misplaced trust, expressed this time by Esther, closes the drama, not Alfonso's invitation to feast before the battle.16 In 1920-1941 Esther curses Alfonso
16
Another circumstancewhich has undoubtedlycontributedto a misunderstanding of the Jildin can be found in the changes made by Josef Kainz, the most famous Alfonso in the stage history of the play: he had the play conclude with the triumphant (?) speech of the King. Vid., for example, Lenz, op. cit., p. 32, who even cites the example of a critic who did not know that the play did not end at that point.
THE TRAGEDY OF DIE JtDIN
VON TOLEDO
51
for having slaughtered a victim "aus den Kleinen".l7 Yet she takes back the curse pronounced on the King, when her father wants to find his gold before taking care of Rahel's body:
Esther
Kommt, Vater, kommt! Wir haben dort zu tun. (Auf die Seitentiire zeigend)
Isaak
(wie aus dem Schlafe erwachend). Doch such' ich erst mein Gold.
Esther
Denkt ihr noch das? Im Angesicht des Jammers und der Not. Dann nehm' ich riick den Fluch, den ich gesprochen, Dann seid Ihr schuldig auch, und ich - und sie. Wir stehn gleich jenen in der Sunder Reihe; Verzeihn wir denn, damit uns Gott verzeihe. (Die Arme gegen die Seitentiire ausgestreckt.) (1942-48) Rahel trusted the King and he abandoned her. Now Isaak puts his money before his paternal obligation. Esther already pronounced the - though obviously too severe - self-judgment (lines 1598-1611) that she had betrayed her sister, who had, as seen throughout the play, trusted her for guidance and help (e.g., 972-977). It is with a belief that she herself, her father and Alfonso have all betrayed their responsibilitytoward Rahel, who trusted them, that she points to the Seitentiire, when she asks forgiveness for all of them. Until the concluding act, Esther plays only a slight role, but after Rahel's death, she represents the continuation of the theme incorporated by Rahel. Esther's role corresponds to that of an antique chorus, because she sees, from the beginning, the inevitable tragedy arising around her sister, experiences it with her and passes the final judg17
Grillparzer'sbelief that the King's decision does not resolve all the questions of the drama can be inferred from his observation on
Lope's Las Paces de los Reyes: "Ja selbst in dem Titel: las pazes
de los Reyes liegt vielleicht eine versteckte Tronie.Im ersten Akte wird der Friede des Konigreichsdurch die verraterische Ermordung Lope de Arenas geschlossen; im Dritten ist das Pfand des Friedens der Tod der von Allen am wenigst schuldigen Jildin" (1. Abt., 15. Bd., 157). Grillparzer even lets Esther pronounce almost the same
judgment in Die Jildin von Toledo.
52
ment. Just as the chorus suffers with and through the hero, Esther suffers with and through Rahel. Nevertheless, Esther still remains on the periphery of events. She does not precipitate the tragedy; she only suffers with the true victim, Rahel. If we are to understand the play, we must note the thematic curve from Act I, in which Rahel appears as the embodiment of life in its purest, most capricious form, through Act III, in which Rahel achieves a purpose in her existence, to Act V, in which Esther speaks the fateful judgment on Alfonso. To make it clear that there is one
continuous line here, which starts below the plane of Alfonso, crosses
it in III and transcends it in V, Grillparzer does not completely drop Rahel after the third act, but rather makes her presence felt even in the last act by using the sound of the murder to introduce the first scene. Her presence is also felt in the many allusions to her body's proximity in the next room. Although Rahel does not speak in Act V, Esther becomes the expression of her new insight. Esther, who has previously remained in the background, is elevated to the same dramatic intensity as Rahel; that is, the role of Esther in V corresponds in thematic and dramatic importance to Rahel's in the preceding acts. The thematic continuation through Esther takes place for two quite obvious reasons. Since the King's inability to grow in moral responsibility must be shown by a reaction to Rahel's fate, he must appear after her death; but he may not be permitted to speak the last word, because the hollowness of his reaction must be shown with dramatic impact. Secondly, the character of Rahel would seem too unbelievable if she spoke the final judgment on Alfonso; although she demonstrates emotional and intellectual growth, the final level she attains cannot seem too far above her initial sphere. Rahel is often described as "childish",but the loss of her childishness occurs with her tragic insight into her situation. When, at the end of Act III, Rahel says that she really loved the King, her declaration is the result of a long struggle against herself. With the conclusion of this struggle, she has emerged from the realm of pure life, of action for its own sake, of a child who trusts without reason. It is her tragic insight that not even the genuineness of her love can protect against the fate set into motion by her "childish" actions, because no one sees the difference. Even in her last minutes she still
53
seeks refuge in the room where she spent the many hours with Alfonso and, in doing so, learned about herself:
Konig.
Sie ist in jenem letzten, innern Zimmer, Wo ich so oft -?

Esther.
Sie ist, sie war, sie bleibt. (1740f.) The room symbolizes the encounter of two people which is in violation of, or isolation from all social, religious and political influences; it represents the idyllic place where one encounters the "Du", but only for Rahel does this encounter prove significant. In the Jewess, Alfonso could have expressed his individuality, but he failed to do so. But because this room symbolizes the last stage of her maturation, Rahel will always remain there. In her ominous final lines Esther calls attention to a basic parallel between this play and Libussa. In his later dramas, Grillparzer shows increasing scepticism towards historical and political progress. Rahel, like Libussa, represents the personal triumph of humanity, but their very humanity prevents both women from adjusting to political necessity. While Prague will flourish, however, Alfonso is damned to defeat in the impending battle, because he was incapable of understanding this humanity.
University of Michigan

381a1a487e8b6d694b2c686fc08e3b8d

Transféré par

Informations du document

Description originale:

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

381a1a487e8b6d694b2c686fc08e3b8d

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

The Tragedy of Die Jdin von Toledo Author(s): Roy C. Cowen Source: The German Quarterly, Vol.

4 (New York, 1938).

3rd ed. (Hamburg, 1955), 440-447. 39

THE GERMAN QUARTERLY

THE TRAGEDY OF DIE JuDIN

THE GERMAN QUARTERLY

THE TRAGEDY OF DIE JUDIN VON TOLEDO

For example, Emil Reich, Grillparzers dramatisches Werk (Vienna,

THE TRAGEDY OF DIE JUDIN VON TOLEDO

THE TRAGEDY OF DIE JUDIN VON TOLEDO

THE GERMAN QUARTERLY

Arturo Farinelli, Grillparzer und Lope de Vega (Berlin, 1894),

THE TRAGEDY OF DIE JUDIN VON TOLEDO

THE TRAGEDY OF DIE JtDIN

THE GERMAN QUARTERLY

THE TRAGEDY OF DIE JUDIN VON TOLEDO

Sie ist in jenem letzten, innern Zimmer, Wo ich so oft -?

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi