Kleist’s Anecdotes and Fables

 

      Among his duties as editor of the Berliner Abendblātter, Heinrich von Kleist wrote feuilletons to fill the journal’s pages.  Sometimes these were like the News of the Weird of the day, sometimes little fables of his own composition. In the small scope of the form, Kleist sometimes manages to create the same tone characteristic of the rest of his oeuvre: a sort of bemused wonder in the face of a fate at once utterly indifferent and yet capable of fiercely ironic circumstances, the subject experiencing the strongest of passions while suspended in a dispassionate cosmos.

     Among the admirers of these little works was Franz Kafka, whose friend Max Brod claimed not only a stylistic similarity but also psychoanalytic parallels between the two writers.  (See Franz Kafka: a Biography, p. 32 ff.) 

          Though it is more artificial in English than in German, the primary quality I ought to preserve was Kleist’s lanky, wandering syntax, unfolding phrase by phrase just as lived experience arrives a bit at a time.

     Brief comments in italics follow each translation.

 

  

Anecdote from the most recent war

     The most monstrous joke perhaps that has passed men’s lips since the world was created was made by a drummer who, I believe, served in the last war in what was then the Puttkamer regiment, a man of whom, as you will soon hear, neither Greek nor Roman history can offer any counterpart.  After the Prussian army had fallen in Jena this man had got hold of a gun with which he alone carried on the battle, such that he shot any French who came within range on the country roads, striking them down and plundering them until a squad of French gendarmes managed to track him and seize him, dragging him into the city where, as it happened, he was condemned to be executed.  When he was brought to the place where the sentence was to be carried out, knowing well that any defense was now impossible, he asked the colonel commanding the detachment for one favor.  When the colonel, his officers crowding about him in waiting and wondering what the man might say, asked what he requested, the man pulled down his pants and said that he would like to be shot in the anus so that he might avoid having a new hole in his skin.  One must note the of the man who, in this extremity, never departed from his role as a beater on sound skins.   

 

     The reader may think of Orwell’s condemned man, stepping aside a puddle to avoid wetting his feet on his way to being hung.  In a way, this drummer maintained his dignity in defeat no less than did Montaigne’s tribal victim who spit at his captors while under torture but with the characteristic Kleistian bizarre individuality.  Thus he earned the poet’s applause.  Surely simply displaying his rear was a sly form of humiliating his captors, since his stated motive is patently absurd.

     Freud taught that jokes are a method for handling anxiety, and mortality is certainly a source of distress.  The soldier’s “Shakespearean quality,” his faithfulness to his role, first evident in his refusal to surrender, persists in a more pointedly dramatic if bizarre form at his execution.  

 

 

Anecdote

     A Capuchin monk accompanied a Swabian to the gallows on a very rainy day.  On the way the condemned man complained to God that he had to walk such a bitter route in such poor and hostile weather.  Wishing to provide Christian consolation, the Capuchin said, “You rogue, why would you complain like that when you need go only one way, while I must make my way back again in this weather.”  -- Whoever can feel how dreary it is for one, on even a fine day, to make one’s way back from a place of execution, will not find the expression of the monk to be foolish.

 

     While the friar may have merely meant to suggest with the orthodox thought that the world is a constant affliction and that there follows a better world (for some at least), he expresses it in such a slyly Kleistian manner that the condemned man’s last moments may have been spent puzzling over them. 

     An English speaker will have little trouble imagining the connotations of the word he uses to address the prisoner “Lump.”  It suggests more a scamp or rascal than a sinner on the threshold of Hell.  The last line poignantly indicates that the Capuchin was bemoaning the state of humanity, so fallen as to build gibbets and use them.   One who did not find an execution to be “dreary” would be a monster more frightening than those of legend.

 

 

The Dog and the Birds

     Two honorable pointers who, schooled by hunger, had come to think themselves quite smart captured anything they spotted on the ground, and one day seized a bird.  The bird, at a disadvantage as he was not in his element, gave way and hopped this way and that while his opponents felt they had triumphed; then, all at once, though sorely pressed, he lifted his wings and lofted into the air, leaving the dogs standing like oysters, those heroes of the pasture, their tails between their legs, gazing after him.

     Moral: When you mount into the air, the wise can only stand and gape.

 

     The story would not exist were it not for the fact that that bird and canine occupy different realms.  When they intersect first one and then the other is at a loss.  The pointers’ sheepish stupefaction in the end follows moments after the bird had felt itself doomed.  The moral to which the author points is heady with optimism.  Kleist surely thought of himself as that bird in joyful flight, having leapt free of limitation, though tomorrow, of course, he may not make good an escape.  

     Note that the dogs are not denied the title they have earned through their hunting.  They are capable heroes, but at a loss when out of their element.  Even the most modest of creatures is at home in its element, each has a sort of perfection which will fail out of context.  The story could have been told by Zhuang Zhou.

 

 

A Fable with No Moral

     “If I only had you,” said the man to a horse that stood before him in saddle and bridle but would not let him mount, “if I only had you as first came out of the woods, an uneducated child of nature, I could lead you quite easily over hill and dale as easily as a bird flies, just as seemed good to me, and that would be good for both of us.  However, you have learned many things, things which I, standing alone before you, as I now do, do not know, such that in the riding arena I must go to you (which God forbid) if we are to understand each other.” 

 

     Horse and man here, like dog and bird before, have irreconcilable visions.  Harmonious cooperation may be imaginable while remaining unachievable.  It is a prelapsarian fantasy, this symbiosis without friction, all the more as each gains learning and culture and strays ever further from that tightly woven interdependency we suspect must surely underlie our present confusion.  The flight of the bird lingers as an image, an ideal of psychic liberation.