Sunday, November 6, 2011

Goethe's Father and Aestheticism


As a brief addendum to my most recent post, this passage from Book II of Goethe's autobiography, Dichtung und Wahrheit, shows that Goethe was well aware of the danger of withdrawing from politics and choosing to live an apolitical, "aesthetic" life because of the example of his own father:
In a city like Frankfurt, where the inhabitants are divided among three religions into three unequal groups, where only a few men, even from among the ruling classes, can join the regiment, there must be many a prosperous and educated man who retreats into himself and constructs for himself his own closed-off existence with his studies and hobbies...Now, my father was one those men who had retreated, who never form a partnership among each other. They assume a position as isolated from each other as from the whole [of society], and even more so because in their isolation they develop idiosyncratic qualities that set them off even more starkly from each other. My father had acquired on his journeys and in the free world a conception of a more elegant and more liberal way of life than was perhaps usual among his fellow citizens. He certainly had predecessors and companions [in this regard].
Goethe then proceeds to describe a number of men from his childhood in Frankfurt who, in one way or another, lived a quieter, more "aesthetic" life. They were men of means who enjoyed poetry and who often collected antiques, paintings, and plants, to the point that their houses must have been small museums. Goethe's father, for example, had a room filled with pictures of Italy and had very strong views concerning poetry (he hated Klopstock).

But, as devoted as these men were to their own private hobbies, they did not abandon the public sphere. One wrote didactic novels in an attempt to foster morality among the aristocracy and bourgeoisie, and another wrote a book advocating toleration for Calvinists as well as Lutherans in Frankfurt. One man gave alms regularly and encourage the poor to reform their lives. A doctor transformed his large home into a state-of-the-art medical school. Goethe characterized all these men as having withdrawn from public life, but they were by no means hermits. What made them unusual for their time and place was that they were wealthy yet did not enter into politics or assume a public office.

The example of these apolitical, yet publicly-minded men leaves open the question of what kind of life a publicly-minded man should lead, a question that concerned Goethe throughout his life. Goethe's ideal in Wilhelm Meisters Lehrjahre was the active (tätig) man. But, what kind of activity was ideal? Should the active man vie for public honors, or should he simply carry out his profession well? Should he perhaps establish a private association intended to benefit the public, such as providing medical care to the poor? As Goethe recognizes, it is impossible in our age for many of those who enjoy some modicum of financial security to enter into politics. Yet what Goethe here criticizes in Dichtung und Wahrheit would actually seem better than the alternative: it is better to find some small way to increase the common weal rather than to indulge in what Goethe calls the bourgeois tendency to become engaged in politics simply by giving an opinion on every distant world event.

5 comments:

Barry said...

I found this piece to be quite good and enjoyed it immensely. Too, I enjoyed it's prior "companion" article. I'll have to go back and reread both.

* * *

One thing that struck me: the ability of rich man in the 18th century to "retreat" from society. I can't help but wonder if this is more difficult (if not impossible today), given the interconnectness of our postmodern world.

Or is that just an optical illusion on my part? Perhaps today it's even easier for the rich or famous to eschew the world at large. Thoughts?

Stephen said...

I'm glad you enjoyed these articles, Barry. My obsession with Goethe, then, isn't completely irrelevant to Americans.

I think it's probably easier for the average man to retreat from society and politics today. I can buy books online and have them delivered to my home, I can write things online without having to contact a printer/publisher, I can listen to music without going to a concert, I can pull a cold beer from my fridge without having to go to the bar, etc. If you look at the examples Goethe gives, you'll see that these men were actually quite active, but they practiced philanthropy rather than going into politics.

I'm not sure of the wider significance of that shift, but it does seem worth noting and investigating.

Aaron Linderman said...

[Blogger ate my original comment. Grumble, grumble...]

I agree with Steve's assessment that retreat is easier today, but I'll argue that part of the reason has to do with compartmentalization.

I don't mean to idealize a bygone age, but there use to be heavy overlap between neighbors, business associates, the worshiping community and the political world. Today each of these categories still exist, but my relationship with each group of people is one-dimensional and ends at the door of the relevant institution. While still maintaining the form of normalcy, I can reduce all my relationships to a superficial level.

Likewise, this results in the shrinkage of the public sphere, a place with multiple common functions. Little wonder, then, that the concept of public service has also declined, replaced by politics (in the narrow sense) as our public activity.

How do we reverse this trend? I'll have to give that some further thought.

Stephen said...

Very good point, Aaron. The description of life among the elite in Frankfurt, an old freie Reichsstadt seems to have resembled a club, which has its advantages and disadvantages.

Barry said...

I can buy books online and have them delivered to my home, I can write things online without having to contact a printer/publisher, I can listen to music without going to a concert, I can pull a cold beer from my fridge without having to go to the bar, etc.

All that's true, of course. But it presents a paradox: in order to be so "removed," one must rely upon the actions of literally countless other individuals. Someone else must grow the wheat, drive it to the distiller, make the beer, drive it to the store, man the check-out lane, etc.

So while we lack so much of the valuable personal contact, we are awash in impersonal "contact." This, to me, is well exemplified by the throngs of nameless, faceless Chinese who manufacture our smartphones--which we use to access facebook and ignore the other passengers on the train or bus.