240 Reviews Kleist:Eine Biographie.By GERHARD SCHULZ.Munich: Beck. 2007. 6o8 pp. C26.90. ISBN 978-3-406-56487-1. Kleist:EineBiographie.By JENS BISKY.Berlin:Rowohlt. 2007. 528 pp. e22.90. ISBN 978-3-87134-515-9. HeinrichvonKleist,the mostmodernofall classicauthors, hashadhardly anyat tention from biographers inrecent decades.Theopposite mighthavebeenexpected given hisuninterrupted popularity amongtheatregoers and readers. To a far greater extent than Lessing, Goethe,orSchiller, Kleist was on anexistential quest. He didnot writetolive, butlivedto write,'weilichesnichtlassen kann'. Not until Kafka would anyotherauthorsoundsopossessedagain.Puzzlesabout theinexpressible 'IT and theinnermost coreofbeingarehisbreadandbutter. Hisworksdo notpermit clear answers ordistancefrom thetext. His complex, difficult life, amarkedcontrast with hisdisciplined oeuvre, readslikeamodernnovel. AKleistbiography isaconsiderable challenge; JensBisky and Gerhard Schulz have now taken itup at the same time. Both books arebeautifully written, and they havemore incommonthantheir identical titles. Thewealthof information they present and their attention tolesser knowndetailsare further similarities. Both authors have resisted thetemptation, prevalent inresearch onKleist,todressconjecture as factfor wantof sources. Life isharderherewithKleist than with other GermanKlassiker. Thebodyof source materialiscomparatively sparseandpatchy: hiscorrespondence, for example, spans nineteenyears(1793-181i) with only twohundredand forty letters and twenty replies, and by and large it is addressed only to familymembers and a handful of friends. Thereareno extant diariesor Ideenmagazine. Crypticallusionsand quo tationsturnthebiographerintoa literary detective. Kleist's letters, a fascinating read in themselves, are also the key to his life and works. They reveal intimate facts, their language is intoxicating, and theyare an education invisual observation. Theycontainalmostall thebasicmotifsof theliterary works.Schulz,indeed, asks whether these lettersare awork of fictionwith Kleist as its sole hero-a question as pertinent as it is shrewd. The letters are attempts to express Kleist's unfathomable inner being,orposed charades, orevenexercisesinthought that he sethimself and hisfiancee WilhelminevonZenge. BiskyandSchulzoccasionally placedifferent emphases on thesparse materialin theletters. Biskyfillsina previously hazypicture ofKleist's militarycareer. He has more to say about his departure from the army as a second lieutenant, interpreting it as an inner rebellion against the Prussian armymachine that no fewer than fifty membersof theKleist family were servingin 18o6.Afterhis resignation, Kleist threw himselfintoa tremendous pursuit ofknowledge, happiness, and intellectual sovereignty. Biskyattributes this decisively tothe popularphilosophy ofthe Enlight enment, and inparticulartoKleist'sunderrated teacher, Christian Ernst Wunsch. Yet this intellectual flightended with a lapse into Prussian discipline, as Kleist des perately proclaimed the idea of a 'lifeplan' to be pursued in isolation and by force. Schulz does not ignore all this by anymeans, but his strength lies in interpreting Kleist's early lettersas a literaryevent between factand fiction.He speaks of a 'topo MLR, 104.1, 2009 241 graphical philosophy' thatturns reality into'reveries'. Kleist'sletters onhis mysteri ous journey to Wurzburgin18oobearparticular testimony tohisvividimagination. He travelled under a false name, and the purpose of his journey is still a mystery. Was he treated for phimosis, ordidhevisitamesmerist for psychological problems? Was heworking for theFreemasons, or involved inmilitary or industrial espionage? The twobiographers agreeentirely that Kleist's struggle fortruth was at the centre ofhis life and thought. The root ofthisstruggle isinthecrisisletters ofspring 18o1, whicharedominated byhis 'doubts' andhisdespairatbeing 'unabletofind truth herebelow'andunabletodecide 'obdas,waswir Wahrheitnennen, wahrhaft Wahrheitist, oderob esunsnurso scheint'; he felt'inward disgust'towards books, knowledge, andhis fellow men. This 'Rendezvous mitdemNichts',asBiskycalls it, alsodrives almostall the characters ofKleist'sstories andcrime dramas, whohaveto solve problems ofnear-infinite complication. In thesetexts, datafrom observations, cross-examinations, dreams, andhallucinations arepressedtogether intoa complex tangle ofperspectives, unknowninliterature before Kleist.This is what makesKleist so fascinating. Kleist was notalone withsuchscepticism aroundi8oo, intheageofearly nihilism andofKant'scritique ofknowledge. His famous observation that we cannotknow whether what we see is the truth or an illusion-'Wenn alle Menschen statt der Augen gruineGlaser hatten . . .'-was not an original thought, as Bisky proves by demonstrating thesources onwhichhedrew. Kleisthimself invited conjecture when he spokeof the'newso-called Kantianphilosophy', a formula recently showntobe a contemporary synonym forthe philosophy ofFichte. None theless,thesearchfor suchsourcesand analogiesisof largely academic interest and a distraction from thecentralissue:thecollapseofKleist'strust inthe worldand its meaningfor his literary works. In amere tenyears Kleist produced eight dramas and the same number of stories. Theyareunparalleled; itishard toargue withBisky'sclaimthat Penthesilea is 'das grof3te Werkderdeutschen Literatur nebenFaustundWallenstein'. Bisky'streatment of thedramas(including theshocking Herrmannsschlacht) setstheminthecontext ofcontemporary stage history and incloseproximity toSchiller, togoodeffect. There islessverveinhis interpretation of theproseworks,but thisisbiography, after all, notliterary criticism. Schulz'sgraspofthe genreisno less...
Read full abstract