Chapter 1
â
The Relationship between Theory and Poetry
Ergreift der Mensch den Stift, schon wird er kategorisch. Das schreibende Subjekt bedient sich der Poetik, schmĂ€ht nicht das Regelwerk berechneter Ăsthetik: das Werk aus hohlem Bauch bleibt meistens illusorisch.
(LUDWIG HARIG1)
This study is concerned with how poetry is composed. It examines the practical relationship between theory and poetry, and argues that the relationship has persevered in complex and changing forms since codifications of practice were first recorded, in Aristotleâs Rhetoric and Poetics.2 Later, far more comprehensive codifications were instrumental in the almost simultaneous birth of German theory and re-birth of German poetry at the beginning of the seventeenth century.
My argument originated in the chance noticing of a similarity between writings by two German poets widely separated in time, a similarity with ramifications that epitomize continuity and change in the theoretical tradition. Both Martin Opitz (1597-1639) and Peter Riihmkorf (1929â ) have produced theory intimately related to their own practice. In the Buch von der Deutschen Poeterey (1624), Opitz writes that a poet âmuà ⊠von sinnreichen einfĂ€llen ⊠seinâ (GW II/1, 349); the title of one of Riihmkorfs numerous essays on poetic composition, written in 1979, is âEinfallskundeâ.3 In each instance, an âEinfallâ is an unbidden idea with immediate bearing on the practices of poetry.
Opitz and Riihmkorf both use the word âEinfallâ when discussing the interdependence of ars and natura. This perennial topic is crucial to the practical relationship between theory and poetry: ars refers to learned theoretical codifications and their application during composition, natura refers to talent and inspiration, and tends to cast doubt on the need for codified precepts. Horace, one of Opitzâs models, poses the question of the balance between ars and natura in the Ars Poetica, and presents art as the poetâs training: âDo good poems come by nature or by art? This is a common question. For my part, I donât see what study can do without a rich vein of talent, nor what good can come of untrained genius. They need each otherâs help and work together in friendship.â4 Opitz adapts Horace to his own time by advocating the appropriation of classical and renaissance precepts to the composition of vernacular poetry, and works within a tradition where poetics is distinct from rhetoric only in its precepts on metre, rhyme and certain genres or forms.5 His âsinnreiche einfĂ€lleâ can therefore be understood as the vernacular equivalent of ingenium, a word used by Horace and later current as a rhetorical term for natural aptitude or practical talent.6 Ingenium balances ars during each of the three rhetorical stages of composition: inventio (âerfmdung ⊠der dingeâ), the discovery of subject-matter; dispositio (âeintheilung der dingeâ), the arrangement of subject-matter; and elocutio (âworteâ), the choice of styleâas well as during the regulation of metre and rhyme (cf. GW II/1, 359). When Opitz paraphrases a further Horatian comment on the interdependence of ars and natura,7 he places âsinnreiche einfĂ€lleâ in a list of natural talents that counterbalance acquired skills (the term euphantasiĆtos is mentioned by Quintilian, and describes the poet or orator who possesses the power of vivid imagination):8
Die worte vnd Syllaben in gewisse gesetze zue dringen/ vnd verse zue schreiben/ ist das allerwenigste was in einem Poeten zue suchen ist. Er muà euphantasidtos, von sinnreichen einfÀllen vnd erfmdungen sein/ muà ein grosses vnverzagtes gemiite haben/ muà hohe sachen bey sich erdencken können/ soll anders seine rede eine art kriegen/ vnd von der erden empor steigen. (GW II/1, 348-9)
Here, the relationship between âsinnreiche einfĂ€lleâ and âerfmdungenâ is confirmed. And they are distinct from the other natural attributes listed, including divine inspirationâsuggested by the phrase âvon der erden empor steigenâ.
In the final chapter of the Buch von der Deutschen Poeterey, however, this configuration shifts slightly. With reference to the Platonic locus classicus on the balance between ars and natura: âHe who comes to poetryâs door without the Musesâ madness, convinced that art will make him an adequate poet, is without fulfilmentâ,9 Opitz appears to argue that divine inspiration replaces practical talent. The role of âsinnreiche einfĂ€lleâ in the discovery of subject-matter and choice of words is assigned to divine fury: âWo diese natĂŒrliche anregung ist/ welche Plato einen Göttlichen furor nenntâŠ/ dĂŒrften weder erfmdung noch worte gesucht werdenâ (GW II/1, 409). The higher power of divine inspiration eclipses the function of âsinnreiche einfĂ€lleâ, and seems to tip the level Horatian balance between natura and ars in favour of natura. Yet balance is nevertheless maintained, since Opitz is arguing not that divine inspiration precludes the need for art, but that it alleviates the labours of art.
It is at first surprising that a twentieth-century poet should be preoccupied with these same issues. Yet, in 1979, RĂŒhmkorf acknowledges that traditional poetics âhĂ€lt⊠beinah ungebrochen anâ (âEinfallskundeâ, 97), while the very title of his essay announces a concern with ars and natura: âEinfallskundeâ translates approximately as âThe art of unbidden ideasâ. It contains an argument that runs through many of RĂŒhmkorfâs theoretical writings, and is later developed into a repudiation of divine fury. In âUber die Arbeitâ,10 RĂŒhmkorf implicitly takes issue with a passage from the Ion, where Plato suggests that divine fury renders art superfluous and says of poets: âgod takes away their senses and uses them as servants, as he does divine prophets and seers, so that we who hear may realize that it is not these persons⊠who are the speakers of such valuable words, but god who speaks and expresses himself to us through themâ (Russell and Winterbottom, 43). The notion of the poet as inspired genius or prophet has coloured opinion of German poetry since the âGeniezeitâ and Romanticism, and appears, of course, to elevate the poetâs standing. But RĂŒhmkorf drastically asserts that it is degrading: if poetry is a product of divine fury, the poet is a mere âGhostwriter der Himmlischenâ (âĂber die Arbeitâ, 28) and has little control over composition. RĂŒhmkorf defends this notion by emphasizing the labours of poetry: âEin halbwegs ernstzunehmendes Gedicht ist nĂ€mlich weder Augenblickssache noch nur Stunden- oder Tagewerk, sondern das Arbeitskondensat von etwa einem Zwölftel Jahrâ (âEinfallskundeâ, 105). A different focus on Plato from a different historical perspective undermines the Opitzian argument that natura alleviates the labours of the ars.
In an earlier essay, RĂŒhmkorfs insistence on the labours of poetry was a plea for financial recognition.11 In âEinfallskundeâ, it is a plea for the recognition of art, and illuminates a âVerlangen nach etwas persönlichem Systemâ (98). This need was pre-empted for Opitz and his contemporaries by the vitality of a general theoretical system, but is emphasized by one of RĂŒhmkorfs immediate predecessors, Gottfried Benn, in âProbleme der Lyrikâ (1951),12 a work crucial to the post-war regeneration of German poetics and poetry. Riihmkorf acknowledges Bennâs term âArtistikâ (âEinfallskundeâ, 120), and redresses the balance between ars and natura through detailed analysis of the âEinfallâ, the chief representative of natura in his essay Like Benn, Riihmkorf follows variations on the classical tradition pursued by another poet-theorist, Paul Valery ValĂ©ry maintained a radical attitude towards the ars while stressing that it remains essentially unchanged by time: âCette besogne delicate nâa guĂšre changĂ© de moyens, ni de caractĂšre depuis quâil existe des poĂštesâ.13 His minute observation of his own labours analyses the interdependence of art and nature, and produces a pragmatic redefinition of divine inspiration. In the essay âAu sujet dâAdonisâ (1920), divine inspiration is identical with natural talent in the literal sense of a gift (âun donâ)âthe âEinfallâ:
Les dieux, gracieusement, nous donnent pour rien tel premier vers; mais câest Ă nous de façonner le second, qui doit consonner avec lâautre, et ne pas ĂȘtre indigne de son aĂźnĂ© surnaturel. Ce nâest pas trop de toutes les ressources de lâexpĂ©rience et de lâesprit pour le rendre comparable au vers qui fut un don. (Ćuvres, i. 482)
âEinfĂ€lleâ have a mysterious forceâValĂ©ry describes himself elsewhere as âtout Ă coup saisi par un rythme qui sâimposait Ă moiâ (Ćuvres, i. 1322); whether they are single lines, rhythms or single words that call for an answering rhyme,14 they play a decisive role in bringing poems into being. And, far from easing the labours of composition, they call forth the utmost expenditure of art. For the modern sensibility, the interdependence of natura and ars is more a question of confrontation than of balance.15
RĂŒhmkorfâs personal system emerges not from the study of codified precepts, but from a series of observations and confrontations with âEinfĂ€lleâ, mediated by recent theory. Yet, consciously or unconsciously, it bears a remarkable resemblance to the stages of composition which comprise the rhetorical arsâalthough the name of each âEntwicklungsphaseâ reflects the mysterious vigour of the modern âEinfair. The first is âANFĂLLE UND AUSSCHLĂGEâ, a gathering of âEinfĂ€lleâ comparable to the discovery of subject-matter in inventio. During the second phase, âDIE KOMPOSITORISCHE VERKRAMPFUNGâ, the gathered âEinfĂ€lleâ seek order in a process resembling dispositio, the arrangement of subject-matter. This is followed by a phase in which the âEinfĂ€lleâ find interconnection and resolution through the speech gestures of the developing poem: âSPASMOLYTISCHE ENTĂUSSERUNGâ is comparable to elocutio, the choice of words. Riihmkorf controls each phase of development, and adds a final one: âDEN SCHĂNEN ORIGINALSCHEINââ applications of âGlanzlicht-extra auf die Naht- und Schwachstellenâ create the appearance of natura by concealing the labours of ars (âEinfallskundeâ, 112-20). Final touches give an impression of polish comparable to the âglantzâ which Opitz wanted to bestow on vernacular poetry (GW II/1, 409). In spite of many differences, RĂŒhmkorfâs concept of natura in the âEinfallâ and his personal codification of ars are recognizable re-workings of issues put forward by Opitz in the Buc...