Hamburg Dramaturgy

This immediately begs the question of “hero” in the HD. (A question hugely important for tragedy.) Is Lessing’s word something like Dryden’s? Like the way Barthes speaks of Racine’s “heroes”? It is not an Aristotelian word, right? This may not be the proper place for a note on this, but it is a question that arises for me.

Ought this to be latter?

Necessity is a term from Greek tragedy, isn’t it? William Arrowsmith is constantly using it as a way of thinking through the most difficult of Euripides’ tragedies – I am thinking particularly of the Heracles and the Hecuba. And yet it seems here that Lessing uses the word without this resonance. Is Lessing’s necessity much simpler than the necessity of a character from Euripides (or at least Arrowsmith’s version of that necessity)?

Wendy, this website is the coolest thing. Does it make sense for me to keep posting questions about word nuances the way I am doing? I am in love with this whole enterprise!

I have to admit to being confused with the sentence beginning “But on the other hand…”. Who is the subject of the “boast” section of this sentence? Could comma placement help?

Might we benefit from a brief synopsis of Le Philosophe Marié? You give one for Voltaire’s play below, and despite Lessing’s insistence on how well known the text is, his own is much more well known than Destouches’s.

These notes are SO helpful.

Is there room to talk a little more about L.A. Gottsched? She is clearly the star of Essay 13. 🙂

Perfect! Thanks.

The proper use of heroic sentiment shows up with Antigone only willing to keep to the laws of the Gods. It would have greatly diminished that play had both sisters to that stance.

I have never heard it before. I like it and it is an excellent warning for all writers. Deaths should be linked to earlier events to satisfy our internal logic of causation.

Is there a St. Hilar in German? The French would probably be Saint-Hilaire, which is a frequent place name and surname.  Hilaire is usually translated into English as Hilary.

Well before Stanislavski and others, Lessing understood the need for both literal and emotional understanding of the text so the actor could convey the fullness of the work to the audience.

Here we see the beginnings of the dichotomy between external and internal acting – that is, the technique of “putting on the clothes and pretending to be the character in voice, motion, etc.” vs the technique of “digging deeply into the actor’s life for analogous emotions and experiences, bringing them to the character and living them, moment to moment on stage”

I find that this statement holds true other than just theater. We see this repeated in history, novels, movies, and real life experiences.

The translator’s explanation in the footnote is somewhat unclear. Was Lessing’s “Ankuendigung” or “Notice” as translated here “the gazette” distributed at the theater’s opening?  Or is Lessing referring to still another publication? If the Preface translated here is that gazette, is there a different preface published with the collected essays in 1769? And where might I find that alternative preface? 

Hi,

I found the ‘new and complete translation of Hamburg Dramturgy’, by G.E Lessing, yet only 4 of the essays are available…what about rest of the 10th?

Thanks a lot,

Regards,

Émilie Gruat

If morality is the core of what defines a Christian tragedy, how would the audience react if morality wasn’t the core and spiritual findings was?

After glancing over how much of the original text Zimmern missed in her initial translation of these essays, it flummoxes me how this is possible.  Why would Zimmern neglect to translate this much of Lessing’s critiques?  For convenience’s sake?

I understand what is being translated although it seems that some of the text is simply repeated and could be translated further more.

http://www.southampton.ac.uk/~sdb2/collier.html

This passage talks about those who consider the state “a high road to hell”. The work I have attached here is an example of a person who proclaimed just that, but the people and the society of the time took note of him and listened and ended the english restoration period. It is interesting that Lessing calls such a man a fool.

http://www.southampton.ac.uk/~sdb2/collier.html

It may be helpful to footnote an example of these people who damn theatre. One example is here, in Jeremy Collier’s “Profaneness of the English Stage”. While this particular work may not have had anything to do with lessing, it may be useful or a reader to realize that while it was usually religious powers who objected to the theatre, the people of society do at times listen to these figures, jut like when Jeremy Collier’s work ended the english restoration of theatre. https://ia802303.us.archive.org/33/items/shortviewofimmor00coll/shortviewofimmor00coll.pdf

Lessing’s sentiments about drama caught my attention because it brings to light issues of the time period about the legitimacy of theatre. The persecution of theatre was justified by deducing it to be immoral. Lessing seems to be saying that although theatre addresses issues with characters and story lines that should not be emulated, having that exposure to such subjects allows for the audience to become aware and reflective. (At least, in good theatre.) Theatre is the voice for the voiceless, a stage that represents facets of human existence in a way that makes us passionate about our relationships with each other and our society.

Dear gruat, We are placing the essays as we complete them. Please continue to watch this space. -Ed.

We invite our readers to inform us whether they have ever found this joke about the fifth act in any prior publication. -Michael Chemers

I would encourage french speakers to check out Marmontel’s original text at https://archive.org/stream/potiquefranoise00marmgoog#page/n55/mode/1up as though Lessing does a great job at translating this, it is fundamentally troublesome interpreting a translation of a translation.

The process of this modern and complete translation of Lessing’s Hamburg Dramaturgy is greatly appreciated! The modern nature of the language used to translate makes observing Lessing’s concepts far more engaging and comprehensible for contemporary readers. By providing a complete translation, readers are permitted to engage in the logic of Lessing’s ideas and criticism in their entirety.  I will be enthusiastically waiting for all 101 essays to be completely translated!

The wording of the phrase “and even Serena seems to have no small desire to do so”, may produce a slight miscalculation of Serena’s desire of death in Cronegks’ Olindo and Sophronia with readers that are not familiar with the entirety of the play. The previous clause expresses that Evander wants to die for the sake of religion, but the following clause expresses that Serena has “no small desire to do so” (which seems to suggest that Serena has ‘no desire’ of death for the sake of religion). However, these two clauses are joined by “and even” indicating that they are similar in thought. In the case that the phrase “no small desire” is intended to generate the implication that Serena has ‘plenty of desire’, it would be of better correspondence to make this implication clear. A footnote to briefly explain may ease this confusion.

So is Lessing saying that some characters should not be so exaggerated or so boring or his he saying that even the most “boring” of characters can show who they are by their actions? also is he questioning the notion that play should take place over a 24 hour span?

Thank you! And thank you for your helpful comments.  

Thank you for your comment! It’s a good point. We will certainly keep this in mind for the next edition of the project. 

Thanks for your comment. L.A. Gottsched is certainly worth knowing. We will keep this in mind for the next edition. In the meantime, for more information about the author, see Susanne Kord’s Little Detours: Letters and Plays by Luise Gottsched. Rochester, NY: Camden House, 2000. 

I’m curious, as I’ve never read Julie, but this intrigued me. Did Rousseau not include this scene because he thought it might be distasteful? Lessing does go on to say that he was worried about the staging, but when he found it was done with grace his worries disappeared and he loved it. Was there a risk of the kind of useless, distasteful violence we see so often in today’s media (and is so hard to get right)?

In the Helen Zimmern translation the joke is present and is worded very similarly “‘But what did she die of?’ – ‘Of what? Of the fifth act,’ was the reply. In very truth the fifth act is an ugly evil disease that carries off many a one to whom the first four acts promised a longer life.” When reading that translation it was a nice break from the tedium of her language, but felt quite out of place; however in this translation it feels quite fitting, because this translation feels less “stuffy” or “pompous,” for lack of a better term (to me at least).

I always thought Lessing’s pejorative reference to the play not being originally intended to be staged in “Bohemia or Spain” was striking because the inaugural performance of the play was indeed not in Hamburg but in Catholic Vienna.  Roschmann (whose version the Hamburger Nationaltheater also used) clearly finished the play precisely for the Catholic stage.

Lessing is thus, in an interesting way, omitting the early production history of the play.

A footnote might be useful here that Lessing seems to believe Cronegk transformed the image of Virgin Mary into one of the Crucifixion in order to avoid offending the sensibilities of a Protestant audience.

Also: Louis-Sebastien Mercier, in a later French version of Cronegk’s play, omitted the icon altogether, instead motivating the persecution of the Christians in Jerusalem through the supposed desecration of a Koran.

Wouldn’t it make sense to keep “picture” as “image” here, since Lessing uses Bild throughout, and it sets up his “an image is an image” better?

Footnote on the significance of the term “Bewunderung” (admiration) for early modern drama theory?

A word of caution on footnote 2.1:  While it is true in Tasso that Clorinde finds out that she was originally born a Christian, Cronegk omits this fact in his depiction of her conversion.

Footnote 2.2:  You might want to spell out why natural causality, which Lessing insists on here, would be necessary for theater as an instrument of moral improvement.  He isn’t explicit here.  More clear elsewhere?

“Applying this to the fourth scene of the third act…”  Footnote that Lessing got this wrong?  Actually the fourth scene of the fourth act in Cronegk’s play.

“These are subtle, elevated circumstances…”  You’ve translated “erheblich” with “elevated” here.  I wonder if the English word “substantial,” although less literal, would convey more the sense that Lessing believes her motivations (familial loyalty, her impending death) are worldly and concrete rather than schwärmerisch.

“If something of the sort had not been necessary in order to keep peace among his audience…”

This is a tough phrase to translate: “wenn nicht zur Beruhigung des Zuschauers etwas hätte geschehen müssen.”

The translation feels to me a little like Voltaire feared audience members might start to fight and argue with one another, but I always assumed Lessing meant that Voltaire (whom Lessing depicts as clearly skeptical about the possibility of radical, religious conversion through the intervention of divine grace) didn’t want to offend the religious sensibilities of his more pious audience?  And his audience would prefer that a noble savage become Christian by the end of the play?

I’ve always wondered why Garrick’s portrayal of Hamlet being frightened by a ghost should have become such a famous example of his talent as an actor.

Does it come from Fielding?  Is there more literature on this question?

It’s especially significant here since Lessing is about to embark on a lengthy discussion of Hamlet, Voltaire, and ghosts.

Does Lessing believe in Christianity or in personal beliefs?

I find the use of “we” when Lessing references the general audience of the time period to be quite interesting.  It seems to be indicative of his belief that general interest in theater has shifted away from neoclassic views and royal or “great” characters, and towards a focus on middle-class heroes and smaller actions.  Lessing applies this shift in interest, a shift which he staunchly supports, to the general theater-going populace with the use of “we.”

These thoughts are developed further in his work Laocoon. I find it particularly interesting that he notes theater to be between poetry and the visual arts, though it does make sense. In Laocoon he seems to be extra-critical of painting and what it can do versus what poetry can, the main difference of which is that poetry can “move.” I wonder if his thoughts on theater changed later in his life.

I don not quite understant how could Lessing uesd the original script of a play as a commentary and stated “they need no commentary’. In my opinion, it is a way of being unprofessional as a dramaturg.

I’ve never seen this joke before; I quite appreciated it.

[…] oblivious as we’re accusing our audience of being. In his Hamburg Dramaturgy, Lessing states that “Moral improvement was to be effected through an appeal to spectators capacity for compassion, rat…. So we are now aiming to make the audience empathise, and see themselves in the approaches to this […]

I believe that this was very eloquently translated and it was also quite accurate in its entity. Through my own experience in everyday life, I have noticed that it the difference between caring for individuals versus caring for a population is quite vast. It seems that while people want to care for problems that more immense populations have, it is significantly easier to identify with individuals and their struggles.

Dear Émilie, The entire translation is now online! Enjoy!

This isn’t going to answer your question, but for clarification: Lessing’s phrase here is “heldenmütiger Diensteifer,” which we translate as “heroic sense of duty” (losing, unfortunately, the idea of “eagerness” implicit in “Eifer”).

yep.  thanks!

On “picture” – you’re right.  It should be “image” again; it’s “Bild” throughout, and we shouldn’t correct Lessing’s repetition by introducing a new word.  Thanks for your sharp eye!

We invite readers to suggest a better translation for “Lichtputzer” than “candlesnuffer”

Good question.  The subject is the person who could want evil for evil’s sake, but perhaps a repetition of the subject is in order to clarify the sentence.  Maybe a better rendering would be something like: “…or that he could act according to vicious principles whose viciousness he recognizes and could even boast of those principles to himself and others.” (The rule is that a comma should not come between a subject and its verb, so as tempting as it is to put a comma after recognizes it would be a grammatical error…) On the next revision, we’ll give some thought to making this sentence less clunky.

Thanks for your suggestion, Peter. I don’t think we meant to convey that L thought V feared his audience would fight among themselves!  Perhaps a better rendition of the thought might be: “If something of the sort had not been necessary to pacify [or calm] the spectator.”  Or maybe: “…to satisfy the sensibilities of the spectator.” We’ll work on it for the final draft.

Good point on “erheblich” – these are the kinds of suggestions that are really helpful to us as we polish the translation. Thanks, Peter.

Thank you for the links to Collier’s text! There are, indeed, parallels between anti-theatrical polemics in 18c England and those in 18c Germany.

comfortable with the moderation to which art obliges them ….

Thank you for the comment! We had also caught that mistake in our revision of the essay for publication. Our revised translation of the sentence will read: “For although this is a silent poetry, it wants to make itself immediately understood by our eyes; and any sense must be gratified if it is to communicate directly to the soul those concepts that have been entrusted to it.”

Daniel, thank you for catching this! We brought over the name from German, but of course that would have been a translation from the French originally. It would indeed be better to use the common English name instead of the Germanized version. We’ll fix for the final draft.

If I understand your comment correctly, you are noting that there is repetition in our translation. This is a dilemma we’ve grappled with as translators – that is, deciding where we should replicate repetition that occurs in the original, and where we should vary our word choice so as to make our translation more lively and readable. For the most part, we’ve tried to give our English readers a sense of what it is like to read the original text, which often means replicating its use (and sometimes overuse!) of repetition.

Thanks for the link. And you’re right – we are providing here a translation of a translation (although we consult the original language to be able to note where Lessing has misinterpreted or edited the text, and we note that in our endnotes).

“jeder Sinn will geschmeichelt sein, wenn er die Begriffe, die man ihm in die Seele zu bringen gibet, unverfälscht überliefern soll.” may mean “every sense must be flattred/satisfied, if (the actor) want it to communicate those concepts—which are given to it— to the soul clearly ”.

That is because, in deutsch, for exemple, “Das Autofahren will gelernt sein” means “(People) must learn how to drive (before drive) ”，but not “Driving is learned”.