Toward a Unified Theory of Early Modern German Poetics and Rhetorics

 
Theoretical Positions to 1700 

Three years before the end ofthe Thirty Years' War, Johann Klaj (1616-56) writes at the beginning ofhis Lobrede der Teutschen Poeterey: "Unser durch die blutigen Mordwaffen ausgemergeltes Teutschland / ruffet uns / seinen Hetzgeliebten /zu: Redet/ Redet/ Redet, daß ich gelehrter absterbe" (Our Germany, gutted by the bloody weapons of murder, calls to us, her beloved ones: Speak, speak, speak, that I might die more learned). This is an emphatic avowal that, even intimes ofwar, vernacular German has the power to communicate knowledge that validates its humanity. 51 Asof1645, the two theories concerning human speech, namely, rhetorics and poetics, were still understood as integrally related theories of communicative action and text production.52 Although historically, as explained at the beginning of this chapter, they derived from distinct traditions,53 focusing on one ofthem leads to ignoring their essential unity. lt is as wrang to think of early modern poetics as a latecomer in rhetorical theory as it is to think of rhetorics as a mere handmaiden to poetics. 54 Their themes complement one another and overlap only at specific points ( especially in the theories of form and figuration). 55 Both genres would yet undergo significant transformation in the eighteenth century in the process of philosophical change. 56 Grammar books also played a rolc in the standardization of High German.57 According to Schottel's Ausführliche Arbeit von der Teutschen HaubtSprache (A Thorough Study ofthe German Principal Language, 1663), German had evolved into a linguistic vehicle of efficient use "in den Abschieden/ in den Catzleyen /Gerichten und Trükkereyen" (in its imperial diets, in its ministries, courts, and printing offices). The goal now, he maintains, should be to find a universal, binding code of communication, "communis Germaniae Mercurius" (like the god Mercury, suitable for the whole of Germany; chap. 2.1). Even before the fifteenth century, rhetoric was regarded as the source both for the fundamentals of communication in general as weil as for thc prose forms of practical writtcn communication in particular. Poctry, on the other hand, was considered the source for the theory of the written production of aesthetic texts; poetic texts were also expected to follow general rhetorical principles. Practitioners of aesthetic communication in the seventeenth century followed developments in both rhetorics and poetics; books concerning either theoretical area stood side by side in libraries. The ancient Greek representatives of rhetoric and poetry, the orator Demosthenes and the poet Homer, enjoy equal status in Opitz's Poeterey: "Das ist Demosthenes. Welcher ob er zwar als der vornemeste redcner in hohe ehren gehalten worden, ist doch der rhum nicht geringer denn Homerus erlanget" (That is Demosthenes, who, though it was as the greatest orator that hc was so highly esteemed, has gained no less fame than Homer; chap. 8). POETICS AND RHETORICS IN EARLY MODERN GERMANY ~ 257 Many of the theoretical questions of modern (sociological) communications, particularly with respect to media, would arise, of course, only after the early modern period. But interest was occasionally expressed in the special problem of performance (writing vs. speech) - rhetorics and poetics were, after all, simultaneously theories about how to formulate texts (production) and how to apply.them (performance) and certainly were not intended as guides for textual analysis in the sense of modern literary criticism. This is not to suggest, however, that rhetorics and poetics did not implicitly provide analytical paradigms useful for classroom instruction or that in individual cases literary-historical and literary-critical perspectives did not begin to manifest themselves. Morhof's Unterricht and Albrecht Christian Rotth's Vollständige Deutsche Poesie (Complete German Poetics, 1688) provide strong evidence ofthis. 58 We may now turn to three topics, or problems, related to the dynamics of communication that were of particular interest to German rhetorics and poetics of the late Middle Ages and the early modern period: 1. Communicative interaction primarily has to do with the active communicator (orator or poet) but also with the partners in communication (audience), forms of social interaction (sel!tings and genera causarum), and rules ofinteraction (aptum and decorum). 2. Communicative performance concerns what is communicatively acceptablc in society, what social purpose is served by the communicative forms treated in rhetorics and poetics, and what kind of communicative pcrformances they should generate ( the role of literature in general, individual text genres, etc.). 3. Text as communicative instrument deals with theories of textual construction and the employment of texts in communicative interaction. What are the possible kinds of texts (genres), techniques of construction (structuring), and principles of construction (form criteria, aesthetics)?

Communicative Interaction:

 Ortitor and Poetti As early as the fifteenth century, Sebastian Brant (1457-1521), the renowned author ofthe European bestseller Das Narrenschiff(The Ship ofFools, 1494), was responding to the potential offered by the printing press by making adjustments in his communicative role.59 In theoretical circles, questions about the social functions of the orMor and the poeta were receiving vigorous attention, as were related questions about changing goals, rules, boundaries, pertinent skills, and forins ofinteraction. In Die Räte von der Rede, Albertanus contemplates the relationships of interactive ·partners ( senders and receivers) and the complex conditions of communication for every utterance in every social context. As sender, or speaker, the communicator must decide how to express his relationship with the addressee verbally and how to regard his communication partner; he is always conscious of which rhetorical strategies will achieve the ·· specifically intended meaning and motivation. Ancient theory separated the spheres of interaction between orator and poet. The orator was responsible for practical communication in the public 258 ~ f;ARLY MODERN GERMAN LITERATURE 1350-1700 sphere (decisions about thegenera causarum). Albertanus addresses four communicative cases: sermon, letter, messenger report, and court defense. The poet, an the other hand, as Julius Caesar Scaliger (1484-1558) points out in the first volume of his renowned Poetices libri septem (Seven Books of Poetics, 1561), is responsible for aestheticized forms of communication, that is, for specialized genres and forms of poetry. Brant exploits the possibilities of the recently invented printing press for composing and distributing "journalistic" texts, thereby putti.ng himselfin the tradition ofthe German minstrel, who performed tasks of practical communication in aesthetic form. This tradition of occasional poetry (Gelegenheitsdichtung; Latin casualcarmina) and occasional poet (Gelegenheitsdichter) continues into the sixteenth century, notwithstanding the distinct preference of the Reformation for prose. The sudden appearance of German-language rhetorics in the fifteenth century was one answer to the new developments in communicative dcmands. Scriptorality - the written, or textual, alternative to orality, the traditional performance-based conceptualization of rhetorics and poetics ( this extended to texts in musical compositions as weil) - advanced rapidly to become the assumed norm of performance in all relevant areas, including epistolary rhetorics,60 and remained so for the next two centuries. As a consequence, the orator came to be treated as a "writer" in fifteenth- and sixteenth-century rhetmical theory.61 Riederer's Spiegel der waren Rhetoric is the most important testament to this historico-cultural development. Riederer systematically distinguishes the person ( or institution) sending the communication from the expert who actually writes the communication. In the early modern period, writers capable of epistolary com - munication were still important to agencies (both individuals and institutions) that depended an the epistle in social transactions. Riederer therefore had good reason to include an expansive theory of the writer at the beginning of his rhetorics - one of the most original texts in early modern rhetorical theory. 62 In addition to other ancient and humanistic works, Riederer adduces the authority of Cicero's De oratore, in which the orator as public communii;ator is central to rhetorical theory. In emulating Cicero, Riederer discerns an analogy between modern and ancient instruments of communication: the modern writer with his chancery epistle corresponds to the ancient orator with hls oral speech. Riederer is speaking of the professional Schreiber, "als der fürsten vnd cantzelschribcr, der Stett, rat und gerichtschriber, notarien, vnd ander, die sich der practic übend vnd neerend" (as princely and chancery writers, municipal writers, council and court writers, notaries, and others who carry out and cultivate the practice; lxii). Compared to private individuals who engage in writing, these expcrts possess a higher level of competence with regard to "tütscher wart, vnd die ze ordnen vnd förmlich zu verfügen" (German words and the ability to order and shape them). Riederer constructs a graduated typology ranging from schooled and experienced writers to those who are still learning. This entails acquaintance with law: on~y well-trained writers in this "kw1st vnnd gestalt·der Rhetoric" (art and form of rhetoric) can guarantee that their compositions are legally sound. Riederer finds this confirmed in Cicero's De oratore, book 1, which, aq10ng.other things, talks about the necessity of the orator's knowledge of law.

Orality as the primary condition of rhetorical communication naturally had its place in the various Latin and German rhetorical systematics ( especially Riederer's Spiegel and Goldtwurm's Schemata rhetorica) until about 1600. Monological oral speech itself, however, became a discrete theoretical subject in Germany only after German-language rhetorics were established. Specialized literature on the dassical monological speech arose only after 1566, with the translations of Italian conversational dassics; these were followed in the early seventeenth century with works on courtly speech and occasional speech, most notably Sattler's Instructio oratoris and his Werbungsbüchlein (Little Book ofCourtship, 1611), the first two independent German rhetorics to deal explicitly and primarily with the speaker.63 After 1600, German rhetorics expanded to indude discussions of the orally performing speaker, particularly with respect to the communicative conditions of baroque courtly culture and bourgeois occasional speech (Kasualrede). Meyfart's Teutsche Rhetorica indudes the various speech acts of the military commander, ofwhom rhetorical competence is expected. He then turns to the speech of the diplomat, who at court wishes to cull the favor of the prince and his councilors. Princely cm.irt hearings are induded as weil, for a well-constructed speech can move the prince as judge to lean toward one of the parties. In his treatment ofthe office ofpreaching (Predigtamt), for which elegance is also essential, Meyfart names typical speech acts that a dergyman should master: "Tröstungen / Warnungen / Vermahnungen / Widerlegungen / Unterrichtungen" (consolations, warnings, admonitions, refutations, instructions; 35 ). He also stresses that any social dass can be made to appear more positively by expert use of rhetorical ornamentation: "Die WohlRedenheit gleisset wie ein Hyacinth an den Bürgern / grünet wie ein Smaragd an den Edlen/ pranget wie ein Jaspis an den Fürsten" (Eloquence gleams like a hyacinth on the citizenry, radiates green like an emerald on the nobles, and shines like a jasper on princes). Wc now turn to the theory of the special communicative role of the poet, known in poetics as poetology (literally, the theory of the poet).64 Konrad von Würzburg speaks of the functional role of the poet and about the literarycommunicative conditions of interaction; in the prologue to Partenopier und Meliur he observes that poets constitute a distinct social institution, or tradition, or communicator dass of Meister: "In Wort und Melodie haben die Meister so Treffliches geschaffen, daß man sich an ihren herrlichen Werken ein vorzügliches Beispiel nehmen kann" (The Meister have created such wonderful things in word and melody that their splendid works may serve as excellent examples).65 The art of poetry had attained a significant degree of selfconfidence with respect to its technical possibilities, but Konrad complains about those poets who, for all their ambition, Jack genuine talent and consequently - since common people Jack powers of discrimination and will buy anything, good or bad, on the market - impede the careers of truly gifted poets. In the prologue to the Trojanischer Krieg he expresses this complaint through the allegory of the nightingale, which ignores the necessities of life, "denn sie findet ihr Lied so schön und so lieblich, daß sie sich zu Tode singt. 1350-1700 Ein wahrer Dichter soll sich daran ein Beispiel nehmen und nicht. auf seine Kunst verzichten, weil man nicht nach ihr verlangt und sich nicht um sie kümmert" (for shc finds her song so beautiful and lovcly that she sings hersclf to death. A true poet should learn from this and not neglect his art, because one dare not desire it and then ignore it). With these words the poet is given the opportunity to choose between taking part in a communicative interaction or rejecting it. Thus a position of poetic self-referentiality has been attained even before 1300, asserting the liberty to cancel the expected communicativc contract; indeed, the poet may step out of any rhetorical intcraction. This had becn unthinkable only a few decades earlier for Gottfried von Strassburg.66 This tendency toward a socially distinct role for the poet evolved into a hcrmeticism, or csotericism, in the Meistersinger schools - private, guild-like associations that sprang up in many German citics in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. The Freiburg Articles ofl513 describe a fraternal community with strict rules for membership; it is a k.ind of mythical brotherhood with common privileges that wcre believcd to have been pledged by Emperor Otto in Mainz.67 As with the trades, external guests in these singing communities were given special Status. Quasi-religious regulations gave the brotherhoods an aura of piety that restricted public access. The Colmarer Ordnung der Meistersingerschule (Colmar Meistersinger School Ordinance) of 1549 states that only "Doctores, Priester, Edelüt vnd alle Radtsuerwandte sampt vnsern bruodernn vnd schwestern einen freyen zuogang zuo vns habenn" (doctors, priests, nobility, and all members ofthe city government, as weil as our brothers and sisters, have free access to us). The proscription of publications of Meistet;gesang, expounded in paragraph 35 of the Nuremberg Tablature, relates to this general retreat from social communicative contexts: the group will give public pcrformances only a fcw times per year. The esoterica of the brotherhoods included strict regulations, even threats ' of punishment extending to behavior outside the singing school itself. The Iglau School Ordinance prescribes exact rituals, including seating orders, gesturcs, and attire. Singers are cxpected to behave in a seemly fashion in inns and are not to sing on the streets at night; disreputable persons are to be turned away from the performa.nces. The singing group must be mindful of its actions and view itsclf as an institution. Thus, all important matters were recordcd and kept in an archive. The goal of the group's activities was to optimize technical sk.ills to the level of Meisterschaft ( mastery). The inversion of this idea was the ambitious but unsk.illed Gelegenheitssinger ( occasional singer) described in.the Colmar Ordinance: he lacks all sk.ill and travels from,pub to pub; he is to be expclled. The internal instrument for judging pcrformance and rank.ing sk.ill levels was thc publicly staged singing competition, in which prizes were awarded as the judge deemed fit. Not surprisingly, the songs contain an abundance of the motifs of challenge, competition, and excellence. 68 The theorcticians of the Baroque - foremost among them Martin Opitz - rejected the sixteenth-century ideal ofthe guild poet-singer who mastered the technical sk.ills ofversification and submitted to group discipline. In chapter 1 of his Poeterey Opitz emphatically denies a purely technical view of poetry:  "bin ich doch solcher gedancken keines weges, das ich vermeine, man könne iemanden durch gewisse regeln vnd gesetze zu einem Poeten machen" (I am in no way of the opinion that someone can be made into a poet through particular rules and laws). In chapter 3 he repudiates the expectation that a poet should be an call with some conventional verses for any social event. Such a pragmatic understanding of the work of poets, he says, is degrading: 69 "Es wird kein buch, keine hochzeit, kein begräbnüß ahn vns gemacht; vnd gleichsam als niemand köndte alleine sterben, gehen vnsere gedichte zuegleich mit jhnen vnter" (No book, no wedding, no funcral is carried out without us; and it is as if no one can die alone without our poems being buried with them). The poetry of the true poet escapes this fate by refusing to be bound to concrete, practical situations. Opitz saw as one of his primary challenges the depragmatizing of poetry: to create, beyond function, a certain autonomous space for poetry as an aesthetic form of verbal interaction, granting its performance the status of a unique communicative event - an appropriation of the Renaissance ideal of the autonomy of the arts. For Opitz, the arts should be far more than ornamentation to social communicative life. Baroque poetics thus generally presumed a more open sphere of communication in both writing and oral perforl'nance than had previously been the case. All narrow restrictions an communication were dismissed, at least in theory. Opitz's Poeterey is motivated by high seriousness of purpose, assuming a national perspective in which German poetry is of proprietary interest to all Germans in cultural competi.tion with other nations. lt is by no means true of Germany, he writes in chapte~ 3, "das es nicht eben dergleichen zue der Poesie tüchtige ingenia können tragen, als jergendt ein anderer ort vnter der Sonnen" ( that its industrious gifts cannot contribute to good poetry just as much as any other country under the sun). The printing press had lang since created new conditions for the distribution and performance of literature.70 Printing and the culture of scriptorality were now presumed conditions for poetry and drama; still, oral performance in specific, ritualistic contexts - though these were no langer determinants in thc poetic process - remained common, and the poet continued to be understood essentially, as in the Latin theoretical literature, as orator-poet. Withdrawal from the social communicative context is never intended, not even when Opitz scems to give preference to the solitary poet over the public orator. The poeta doctus Jives in and is active within the communicative world; he devotes himself to reclusive study because it is essential to the poetic process, but ultimately he does what he does for the sake of socicty. The poet was regularly identified in German-language poetics, as in the Poet (1665) of August Buchner (1591-1661), by the technical term orator, just as in the Latin-language poetics, such as Vadianus's De poetica.71 Scaliger's Poetices, which the German Baroque accepted as a primary authority, justifies the poetic art in an introductory chapter. This apologia offers nothing essentially new to the traditional understanding of the poetic process in which poetry is conceptualized as a kind of rhetoric and the poet as a particularly eloquent and subtle speaker.72 Still, the Rt:naissance conception of 262 'i  1350-1700 inspired poetry gave the seventeenth-century German orator-poet a unique fashioning, lifting, by force of its inner, depragmatizing logic, the communicative activity of the poet above the merely practical forms of mundane human interaction.73 Opitz too draws a distinction between the ambitious dilettante and the true poet: "Doch muß ich gleichwohl bekennen, das auch an verachtung der Poeterey die jenigen nicht wenig schuldt tragen, welche ahn allen danck Poeten sein wollen, vnd [ ... ] ihre vnwissenscheit vnter dem Lorbeerkrantze verdecken" (And 1 must also observe that there are certain others guilty of bearing scorn for poetry, namely those who wish to be poets without deserving it and veil their ignorance behind the laurel wreath; chap. 3). What distinguishes them is not the mechanical art of rhyme and singing but rather divine inspiration and natural talent: the work of real poets comes (he recalls Plato here) from nature and divine inspiration. Opitz does not exaggerate this side of the ancient rhetorical opposition of talent and learned technique (natura and ars),74 since this would be to ignore the indispensability of"vbung" (exercise) and "fleiss" (hard work). However, while grantiiig the usefulness oftechnique, Juror poeticus is not given to imitation:75 "ein Poete kan nicht schreiben wenn er wil, sondern wenn er kan" (a poet cannot write when he wants but when he is able). This certainty is expanded by Opitz's successors.76 In 1645 Klaj writes in his Lobrede der Teutschen Poeterey: