Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

had not the prominent place he attained in Rome; and the Greek sculptors, when they represented him, represented him as the victor returning, after conflict, to repose, holding in his hand the olive branch, while at his feet sat Eros. The Roman sculptors, or those who worked for Rome, represented Mars as the God of War in all his terrors, in the very act of leading on to victory. But, different as these two conceptions were, they were both conceptions of the God of War; Goethe may be likened to the one, and Schiller to the other: both were kindred spirits united by a common purpose.

Having touched upon the points of contrast, it will now be needful to say a word on those points of resemblance which served as the basis of their union. It will be unnecessary to instance the obvious points which two such poets must have had in common; the mention of some less obvious will suffice for our present purpose. They were both profoundly convinced that Art was no luxury of leisure, no mere amusement to charm the idle, or relax the care worn; but a mighty influence, serious in its aims although pleasurable in its means; a sister of Religion, by whose aid the great world-scheme was wrought into reality. This was with them no mere sonorous phrase. They were thoroughly in earnest. They believed that Culture would raise Humanity to its full powers; and they, as artists, knew no Culture equal to that of Art. It was probably a perception of this belief that made Karl Grun say, "Goethe was the most ideal Idealist the earth has ever borne; an aesthetic Idealist." And hence the origin of the widespread error that Goethe "only looked at life as an artist," i.e., cared only for human nature inasmuch as it afforded him materials for Art; a point which will be more fully examined hereafter. The phases of their development had been very similar, and had brought them to a similar standing-point. They both began rebelliously; they both emerged from titanic lawlessness in emerging from youth to manhood. In Italy the sight of ancient masterpieces completed Goethe's metamorphosis. Schiller had to work through his in the gloomy North, and under the constant pressure of anxieties. He, too, pined for Italy, and thought the climate of Greece would make him a poet. But his intense and historical mind found neither stimulus nor enjoyment in plastic Art. Noble men and noble deeds were the food which nourished his great soul. "His poetic purification came from moral ideals; whereas in Goethe the moral ideal came from the artistic." Plutarch

was Schiller's Bible. The ancient masterpieces of poetry came to him in this period of his development, to lead him gently by the hand onwards to the very point where Goethe stood. He read the Greek tragedians in wretched French translations, and with such aid laboriously translated the Iphigenia of Euripides. Homer, in Voss's faithful version, became to him what Homer long was to Goethe. And how thoroughly he threw himself into the ancient world may be seen in his poem, The Gods of Greece. Like Goethe, he had found his religious opinions gradually separating him more and more from the orthodox Christians; and, like Goethe, he had woven for himself a system out of Spinoza, Kant, and the Grecian sages.

At the time, then, that these two men seemed most opposed to each other, and were opposed in feeling, they were gradually drawing closer and closer in the very lines of their development, and a firm basis was prepared for solid and enduring union. Goethe was five-and-forty, Schiller five-and-thirty. Goethe had much to give, which Schiller gratefully accepted; and if he could not in return influence the developed mind of his great friend, nor add to the vast stores of its knowledge and experience, he could give him that which was even more valuable, sympathy and impulse. He excited Goethe to work. He withdrew him from the engrossing pursuit of science, and restored him once more to poetry. He urged him to finish what was already commenced, and not to leave his work all fragments. They worked together with the same purpose and with the same earnestness, and their union is the most glorious episode in the lives of both, and remains as an external exemplar of a noble friendship.

Of all the tributes to Schiller's greatness which an enthu siastic people has pronounced, there is perhaps nothing which carries a greater weight of tenderness and authority than Goethe's noble praise. It is a very curious fact in the history of Shakspeare, that he is not known to have written a single line in praise of any contemporary poet. The fashion of those days was for each poet to write verses in eulogy of his friends; and the eulogies written by Shakspeare's friends are such as to satisfy even the idolatry of admirers in our day; but there exists no eulogy, no single verse, from him whose eulogy was more worth having than that of all the rest put together. Had literary gossip, pregnant with literary malice, produced the absurd mpression that Shakspeare was cold, selfish, and self-idolatrous,

this curious fact would have been made a damning proof. I have so often in these pages used Shakspeare as a contrast to Goethe, that it would be wrong not to contrast him also on this point. Of all the failings usually attributed to literary men, Goethe had the least of what could be called jealousy; of all the qualities which sit gracefully on greatness, he had the most of magnanimity. The stream of time will carry down to after ages the memory of several whose names will live only in his praise; and the future students of Literary History will have no fact to note of Goethe similar to that noted of Shakspeare: they will see how enthusiastic was his admiration of his rivals, Schiller, Voss, and Herder, and how quick he was to perceive the genius of Scott, Byron, Béranger, and Manzoni.

But I must quit this attempt to characterize the two rivals, and proceed to narrate their active coöperation in the common work.

While the great world was agitated to its depths by the rapid march of the revolution, the little world of Weimar pursued the even tenor of its way, very much as if nothing concerning the destinies of mankind were then in action. Because Goethe is the greatest figure in Germany, the eyes of all Germans are turned towards him, anxious to see how he bore himself in those days. They see him They see him- not moving with the current of ideas, not actively sympathizing with events; and some of them find no better explanation of what they see than the brief formula that "he was an egotist." If they look, however, at his companions and rivals, they will find a similar indifference. Wieland, the avowed enemy of all despotism, was frightened by the Reign of Terror into demanding a dictatorship. Norstrange as it may appear was Schiller, the poet of Freedom, the creator of Posa, more favorable to the French than Goethe himself. The Republic had honored him in a singular way. It had forwarded him the diploma of citizenship; a dignity conferred at the same time on Washington, Franklin, Tom Paine, Pestalozzi, Campe, and Anacharsis Clootz! The diploma signed by Danton and Roland, dated 6th September, 1792, is now preserved in the Library at Weimar, where visitors will notice the characteristic accuracy of the French in the spelling of Schiller's name, à Monsieur Gille, publiciste allemand. This honor Schiller owed to his "Robbers," or, as his admirers called it, "Robert, chef de Brigands." From the very first he had looked with no favorable eye on the Revolution, and the trial of Louis

XVI. produced so deep an impression on him, that he commenced an address to the National Convention, which was, however, outrun by rapid events. Like Wieland, he saw no hope but in a dictatorship.

Such being the position of the leading minds, we are not to wonder if we find them pursuing their avocations just as if nothing were going on in France or elsewhere. Weimar could play no part in European politics. The men of Weimar had their part to play in Literature, through which they saw a possible regeneration. Believing in the potent efficacy of culture, they devoted themselves with patriotism to that. A glance at the condition of German Literature will show how patriotism had noble work to do in such a cause.

The Leipsic Fair was a rival to our Minerva Press; Chivalry-romances, Robber-stories and Specter-romances, old German superstitions, Augustus Lafontaine's sentimental family-pictures, and Plays of the Sturm und Drang style, swarmed into the sacred places of Art, like another invasion of the Goths. On the stage Kotzebue was king. The "Stranger" was filling every theater, and moving the sensibilities of a too readily moved pit. Klopstock was becoming more and more oracular, less and less poetical. Jean Paul indeed gave signs of power and originality; but except Goethe and Schiller, Voss, who had written his "Luise" and translated Homer, alone seemed likely to form the chief of a school of which the nation might be proud.

It was in this state of things that Schiller conceived the plan of a periodical, — Die Horen, memorable in many ways to all students of German Literature. Goethe, Herder, Kant, Fichte, the Humboldts, Klopstock, Jacobi, Engel, Meyer, Garve, Matthisson, and others, were to form a phalanx whose irresistible might should speedily give them possession of the land.

Such was the undertaking which formed the first link in the friendship of Goethe and Schiller.

JONAS LIE.

LIE, JONAS LAURITZ IDEMIL, a noted Norwegian novelist and poet; born at Hongsound, near Drammen, Norway, November 6, 1833. He was educated at Bergen and the University of Christiania, adopted the legal profession, and began practice in Kongsvinger. He published a volume of "Poems" in 1866 and not long after gave up his profession, and for a short time was a journalist in Christiania. In 1871 he left Norway, and has since lived abroad, his winter residence being in Paris. In 1870 appeared his first story, "Den Fremsynte" ("The Man with the Second Sight"); in 1871, a volume of short stories, "Fortaellinger;" and in 1872 a novel, "Tremasteren Fremtiden" ("The Three-master The Future""). His subsequent works are "Lodsen og hans Hustru ("The Pilot and his Wife"), a novel which has been extensively translated (1874); "Faustina Strozzi," a drama in verse (1876); "Thomas Ross" (1878); "Adam Schrader" (1879); "Grabow's Cat," a comedy (1880); "Rutland" (1881); "Gaa paa" ("Go Ahead") (1882); "Livsslaven" ("The Slave for Life") (1883); " Familjen paa Gilje " ("The Family at Gilje") (1883); "En Malström " ("A Whirlpool") (1883); "Kommandörens Döttre" ("The Commodore's Daughters") (1886); "Et Samlir" ("A Wedded Life") (1887); "Maisa Jons "" (1888); "Onde Magter" ("Evil Forces") (1890); "Otte Fortaellinger," a volume of stories (1890); "Poems" (1890); "Trold," a collection of sea stories (1891); "Niobe " (1894); “Naar Sol gaar ned" ("At Sunset ") (1895); "Dyre Rein" (1896). His life has been written by Arne Garborg, "Jonas Lie, en Udviklingshistorie" (1893).

[ocr errors]

THE TEMPTATION.

(From "Niobe.")

IT was late before the doctor started homewards. He had not been able to convince himself that it was a case of diphtheria, but had taken all necessary precautions to isolate the case and prevent contagion.

VOL. XIII.-30

« AnteriorContinuar »