{"title":"终极神圣还是良性平庸:围绕赫尔曼·黑塞的批判争论","authors":"R. Koester","doi":"10.1353/RMR.1973.0010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Although more than a decade has elapsed since Hermann Hesse's death, no generally accepted critical concensus on the man or his art has yet emerged. In fact, most current estimates of the author appear irreconcilably polarized between extravagant adulation and excessive detraction. Admittedly, this dichotomy is not the only difficulty plaguing Hesse criticism; yet its elimination would go a long way toward curing his ailing literary reputation. The contemporary Hesse debate, which resembles a tug-of-war between literary hagiographers and iconoclasts, has demonstrable historical antecedents, going back to World War I and its aftermath. With the publication of his wartime essays, especially the first, \"O Freunde, nicht diese Tonel\" (1914), Hesse became, almost overnight, the enfant terrible of German letters. His pacifistic appeals to nonviolent humanism stirred up a jingoistic hornet's nest and touched off a campaign of vilification in the chauvinistic press, which resulted in a partial boycott of his works by book dealers and readers. Then, while shrill wartime invectives were still ringing in his ears, he found himself abruptly elevated to unprecedented esteem after the 1919 publication of Demian. Germany's postwar youth greeted this novel with such enthusiasm that its author was swiftly adopted as a spokesman for the new generation and, to some extent, as its spiritual guide. It should be noted, however, that Hesse's meteoric rise to popularity was based chiefly on the sociological and political climate of the time. Among the young, who were bewildered and distressed by the topsy-turvy world inherited from their elders, was widespread disenchantment with the older generation, with prevailing authority, and with traditional standards of value, all of which were blamed for the chaos in the country. Consequently, they turned to Hesse, in whose writings-or perhaps I should say-into whose writings they read affinitive sentiments with which they could identify. The principal object of their concern was not his art per se, but whatever personally meaningful data they could extract from his work. In other words, his admirers ignored the central question of aesthetic merit no less than his adversaries. It is this World War I dispute which established an unwholesome pattern of appraisal that, mutatis mutandis, has haunted Hesse ever since. The issue of the poet's talent or lack of it becomes peripheral and his work is gauged","PeriodicalId":344945,"journal":{"name":"Bulletin of the Rocky Mountain Modern Language Association","volume":"3 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1973-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Terminal Sanctity or Benign Banality: The Critical Controversy Surrounding Hermann Hesse\",\"authors\":\"R. Koester\",\"doi\":\"10.1353/RMR.1973.0010\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Although more than a decade has elapsed since Hermann Hesse's death, no generally accepted critical concensus on the man or his art has yet emerged. In fact, most current estimates of the author appear irreconcilably polarized between extravagant adulation and excessive detraction. Admittedly, this dichotomy is not the only difficulty plaguing Hesse criticism; yet its elimination would go a long way toward curing his ailing literary reputation. The contemporary Hesse debate, which resembles a tug-of-war between literary hagiographers and iconoclasts, has demonstrable historical antecedents, going back to World War I and its aftermath. With the publication of his wartime essays, especially the first, \\\"O Freunde, nicht diese Tonel\\\" (1914), Hesse became, almost overnight, the enfant terrible of German letters. His pacifistic appeals to nonviolent humanism stirred up a jingoistic hornet's nest and touched off a campaign of vilification in the chauvinistic press, which resulted in a partial boycott of his works by book dealers and readers. Then, while shrill wartime invectives were still ringing in his ears, he found himself abruptly elevated to unprecedented esteem after the 1919 publication of Demian. Germany's postwar youth greeted this novel with such enthusiasm that its author was swiftly adopted as a spokesman for the new generation and, to some extent, as its spiritual guide. It should be noted, however, that Hesse's meteoric rise to popularity was based chiefly on the sociological and political climate of the time. Among the young, who were bewildered and distressed by the topsy-turvy world inherited from their elders, was widespread disenchantment with the older generation, with prevailing authority, and with traditional standards of value, all of which were blamed for the chaos in the country. Consequently, they turned to Hesse, in whose writings-or perhaps I should say-into whose writings they read affinitive sentiments with which they could identify. The principal object of their concern was not his art per se, but whatever personally meaningful data they could extract from his work. In other words, his admirers ignored the central question of aesthetic merit no less than his adversaries. It is this World War I dispute which established an unwholesome pattern of appraisal that, mutatis mutandis, has haunted Hesse ever since. The issue of the poet's talent or lack of it becomes peripheral and his work is gauged\",\"PeriodicalId\":344945,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Bulletin of the Rocky Mountain Modern Language Association\",\"volume\":\"3 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1973-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Bulletin of the Rocky Mountain Modern Language Association\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1353/RMR.1973.0010\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bulletin of the Rocky Mountain Modern Language Association","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/RMR.1973.0010","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
虽然赫尔曼·黑塞(Hermann Hesse)去世已经十多年了,但评论界对他或他的艺术还没有达成普遍接受的共识。事实上,目前对作者的大多数评价似乎在过分的奉承和过度的贬低之间出现了不可调和的两极分化。诚然,这种二分法并不是困扰黑塞批评的唯一困难;然而,它的消失将对挽救他每况愈下的文学声誉大有帮助。当代关于黑塞的争论,就像文学圣人和反传统者之间的拉锯战,有明显的历史渊源,可以追溯到第一次世界大战及其后果。随着他的战时散文的出版,尤其是第一篇《O Freunde, night diese Tonel》(1914)的出版,黑塞几乎在一夜之间成为了德国文学界的孩子。他对非暴力人道主义的和平主义呼吁激起了沙文主义的马蜂窝,并在沙文主义的媒体上引发了一场诋毁运动,导致书商和读者部分抵制他的作品。1919年《德米安》出版后,他发现自己突然获得了前所未有的尊重,尽管战时尖锐的谩骂仍在他耳边回响。战后德国的年轻人对这部小说热情高涨,其作者迅速成为新一代的代言人,在某种程度上也成为了他们的精神导师。然而,应该指出的是,黑塞的迅速走红主要是基于当时的社会和政治气候。年轻人对从他们的长辈那里继承下来的混乱的世界感到困惑和苦恼,他们普遍对老一辈、主流权威和传统价值标准感到失望,所有这些都被认为是造成这个国家混乱的原因。因此,他们转向了黑塞,在他的作品中——或者我应该说——他们从他的作品中读到了他们能够认同的亲和情感。他们关心的主要对象不是他的艺术本身,而是他们可以从他的作品中提取的任何个人有意义的数据。换句话说,他的崇拜者和他的对手一样忽视了美学价值的核心问题。正是第一次世界大战的争论建立了一种不健康的评价模式,这种模式经过必要的修改后,一直困扰着黑塞。诗人才华或缺乏才华的问题变得次要,他的作品被衡量
Terminal Sanctity or Benign Banality: The Critical Controversy Surrounding Hermann Hesse
Although more than a decade has elapsed since Hermann Hesse's death, no generally accepted critical concensus on the man or his art has yet emerged. In fact, most current estimates of the author appear irreconcilably polarized between extravagant adulation and excessive detraction. Admittedly, this dichotomy is not the only difficulty plaguing Hesse criticism; yet its elimination would go a long way toward curing his ailing literary reputation. The contemporary Hesse debate, which resembles a tug-of-war between literary hagiographers and iconoclasts, has demonstrable historical antecedents, going back to World War I and its aftermath. With the publication of his wartime essays, especially the first, "O Freunde, nicht diese Tonel" (1914), Hesse became, almost overnight, the enfant terrible of German letters. His pacifistic appeals to nonviolent humanism stirred up a jingoistic hornet's nest and touched off a campaign of vilification in the chauvinistic press, which resulted in a partial boycott of his works by book dealers and readers. Then, while shrill wartime invectives were still ringing in his ears, he found himself abruptly elevated to unprecedented esteem after the 1919 publication of Demian. Germany's postwar youth greeted this novel with such enthusiasm that its author was swiftly adopted as a spokesman for the new generation and, to some extent, as its spiritual guide. It should be noted, however, that Hesse's meteoric rise to popularity was based chiefly on the sociological and political climate of the time. Among the young, who were bewildered and distressed by the topsy-turvy world inherited from their elders, was widespread disenchantment with the older generation, with prevailing authority, and with traditional standards of value, all of which were blamed for the chaos in the country. Consequently, they turned to Hesse, in whose writings-or perhaps I should say-into whose writings they read affinitive sentiments with which they could identify. The principal object of their concern was not his art per se, but whatever personally meaningful data they could extract from his work. In other words, his admirers ignored the central question of aesthetic merit no less than his adversaries. It is this World War I dispute which established an unwholesome pattern of appraisal that, mutatis mutandis, has haunted Hesse ever since. The issue of the poet's talent or lack of it becomes peripheral and his work is gauged