Even a critically engaged discussion, as found for example in pamphlets written by Erasmus von Rotterdam — and Sebastian Franck — or at the beginning of the sixteenth century, must have seemed insufficient to 3 Grimmelshausen after a thirty-year war. He must have arrived at the realization that this war, which depleted and demoralized the civil population like no earlier conflict in European history, cannot be spoken of as an object.
In order to have a better approach to the monstrosity of war and to expose it as a phenomenon that was simultaneously desired, created, experienced and suffered by people, Grimmelshausen makes his personal experience of the war the theme, while making use of the form of the autobiographical novel. Grimmelshausen chose no heroes as protagonists for his novels. Instead he tells the life stories of ordinary individuals, who, voluntarily or involuntarily, participated in the war, who hoped they would lose nothing in and with the war, and who perhaps even sought to make a fortune.
This is exposed in his novels as a grand illusion. All his characters, after all, have to fight for mere survival, and when they are able to save themselves, they are either physically injured like Springinsfeld, or morally traumatized like Simplicius and Courasche. Thus, with Grimmelshausen the war ceases to be a stage for heroes in German baroque literature as had been the case in the courtly novels. With their heroes battling gods, fate and enemy warriors, neither Homer nor Virgil could serve as role models for this German poet of the baroque era, nor could Torquato Tasso with his Christian heroes who liberated Jerusalem from the clutch of the Mohammedans.
He had to create something new so as to illustrate the modern chimera of war by way of narrative. In order to solve adequately the self-imposed task in a literary manner, Grimmelshausen invents a double narrative perspective in the first person, a first person narrator. Simplicius the island dweller and mature skeptic removed from the world as such, the disillusioned Springinsfeld, or the untamable Courasche in gypsy costume — all tell their life story only in advanced years.
However, Simplicius also tells in the Continuatio of a newly won personal relationship to God and of a belief in eternal values, which, however, pose imminent obligatory character. Each first person narrator also is given a clerk or an editor, who prepares for print the material read or heard. The change from Satyrischer Pilgram to Simplicissimus Teutsch, that is, the change from treatise to autobiographical novel, implies a change in the relationship between author-reader and addressees.
Instead of an omniscient and lecturing author, we have a searching, insecure, personal narrator, who is capable of admitting mistakes and who is remorseful. With the choice of a fictive narrative form Grimmelshausen addresses a wider audience.
ROAD EYE CLASSICS DOCUMENT PDF Original - Free E-Book Download
He reaches all those who have limited schooling in and little interest for abstract thought processes that have as their theme a cogent consideration of the different theses regarding war. He can convince such individuals of the monstrosity of the war only if his narration captures, entertains, and stimulates them to contemplation. Perhaps because of this, unlike almost any other later German author, he was able to exhaust the possibilities of a genre without falling prey to the danger of simplification. He understood how to narrate a difficult theme like the behavior of people in war without being overly didactic and pedantic.
He neither offers a banal treatment of the problems nor does he loudmouth heroism, but rather narrates in an entertaining manner, drawing on the emotion and reason of his readers.
Ein Ehestands-Candidat Oder Herr Fractin
At the same time, Grimmelshausen makes it clear that the close relationship of these two elements is neither a sales strategy nor a clever moral and didactic method, but rather that it is situated in the nature of the author and in the object itself. He actually defends satirical writing as an expression of a worldview that is not melancholic, which derives its justification from the justice and compassion of the Almighty. Grimmelshausen argues that heaven and hell, sin and salvation must be seen as belonging together. Thus, neither a rejoicing Democritus nor a mourning Eraclitus alone is sufficient in the eyes of Grimmelshausen as a model for contemplation and knowledge of the world cf.
Springinsfeld 18— This is readily seen in the titles, which characterize the works as biographies of a person, namely Simplicissimus 5 6 Teutsch, Courasche and Springinsfeld. It is thus worthwhile to take a more careful look at this technique. In no way do his comments automatically possess authorial character. In reference to this, the opening of Simplicissimus will serve as an example.
Since he does not know who the strangers are who suddenly appear in the forest, their action remains incomprehensible to him. Simplicius draws parallels to the daily routine of the farm in order to describe the events that took place. Simplicius even considers the torture of his Knan a funny game, because the latter is literally being tickled to death and must constantly laugh.
Without using a lot of words, Grimmelshausen makes the reality of war in all of its cruelty all the more clear by setting it in contrast with the background of a happy get-together. The role of the old Simplicius does not exhaust itself in this alone. He interprets it traditionally as the expression of divine providence and punishment. The depiction of the event from the perspective of the young Simplicius, the rape of the innocent girls and his stepsister, as well as the torture of the servant and the other farmers, make such an evaluation of the event seem, at the very least, 7 insufficient.
The incongruity between traditional Christian teaching and the unheard of cruelty of the war, which is illustrated through the double Iperspective, presents the reader with a central theme throughout the entire cycle of novels. That theme is how perception, conviction, and knowledge relate to reality. Through the doubling of the first person perspective in a novel, the point of view of each first person narrator in the novels is shown to be changeable and capable of being confronted with and mirrored in each of the others.
The particular ages, the respective levels of knowledge and experience, and the resulting specific courses of action in the world are made evident and relativized.
These events constantly demand new behaviors of them, and frequently they force the main characters to adopt new perspectives and convictions. Let us look at an example. Although the war suddenly ends a protected childhood for Simplicius and Libuschka-Courasche, both, throughout their lives, find themselves unexpectedly in situations that fundamentally change their existence. The individual person is thus as subject to change as everything else in the world. The enumeration of the various military ranks of Courasche on the title page of Courasche clearly indicates this. None of the first-person narrators can claim to have exclusive possession of the truth or even to have an objective viewpoint.
Through the telling of his biography, Springinsfeld hopes not to have to continue as a docile servant of Courasche. In spite of a noticeable contrast with the preceding novels in terms of narrative style and theme, the two parts of Das Wunderbarliche VogelNest, which first appeared in and , are to be interpreted in the context of the cycle as well. The main characters of Wunderbarliches Vogel-Nest I and II, the halberdier of part one and the rich businessman of part two, are pale in comparison with Simplicius, Courasche, and Springinsfeld. There is thus no complex first person perspective to speak of here.
Instead, Grimmelshausen experiments in these two novels with the two extreme possibilities of the first person narrator: the erosion versus the absolutizing of the first person narrative perspective. This possession, however, simply amplifies a stance, which has already been expressed through the jobs they hold, toward the world and their fellow humans. The businessman, by contrast, appropriates whatever he wants.
Whereas in the first half of the work the reader, together with the first person narrator, casts a wide and impersonal eye toward a panoramic view of the world, in the second half the view becomes largely focused on the one of the businessman, since he absolutizes his perspective. Beliefs in God and in a Christianity characterized by active charity finally provide him with new support. Grimmelshausen reminds us through his simple halberdier that the awareness of the perspectivism of human thought, emotion, and action, and his Simplician cycle as well do not have impartiality and incapacity to act as their goal.
On the other hand, in the figure of the corrupt, cynical businessman, Grimmelshausen presents in an unusually stark manner a human being who thinks in pre-fashioned categories, who questions neither himself nor the world, and who is even incapable of relativizing anything, precisely because he only follows his own interests. Even when, after making it through a life-threatening situation, he remorsefully turns away from his prior way of life, he remains caught within a formal and traditional religiosity, which serves him more or less as life insurance on the hereafter.
Grimmelshausen therefore takes leave of the reader of the Simplician cycle by underscoring the positive meaning of both skepticism and irony as an attitude toward not only the world, but also toward oneself and by, indirectly, trying once again to justify his satirical novels. Grimmelshausen himself manifests this attitude when he treats the figure of the wealthy tradesman with ironic distance in the prologues and in the chapter headings see also below.
The doubling of the first person perspective in the individual novels and the plurality of first person perspectives in the cycle as a whole make it clear that Grimmelshausen was not concerned with depicting the inner world of individual subjects, as by contrast the future Entwicklungsroman would do.
Rather, he wanted to narrate the dramatic life of man in the world. This they learn in a world that, however, claims to be a Christian world and that claims to be fighting war in the name of a true Christianity. Yet, in the long run they fail to assert themselves in the world. In order to save themselves they start to withdraw more or less and in differing fashion.
Courasche leaves an allegedly civilized Europe and enters the community of Gypsies. Springinsfeld, by contrast, withdraws to the farm of Simplicius, and the rich tradesman and the halberdier turn into authors of didactic treatises.
Every withdrawal from the world in the novels, however, is neither total nor permanent and every private idyll comes to a sudden end. None of the figures enters a monastery or chooses the ascetic hermitage. Even the religious dimension of man is not one that can be realized against the world. As the novel cycle with its rich range of perspectives shows, religion itself cannot claim sole possession of absolute truth, for otherwise it could not serve as the salvation of man. Instead, the perspectivism and relativism of human perception and insights must be taken seriously so as to keep the unavoidably tense relationship between man and the world from becoming destructive.
Still, it becomes especially apparent that Courasche enforces this notion.