Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Ideological Drama in 15th Century France
by Jonathan Beck
The 15th century in France: war, famine and plague; oorruption and
disorder in the p:>litical and ecclesiastical hierarchies; a noribund
culture, a civilization in decline, a litercuy burial ground in which were
laid to rest or tcMard which were declining the final enfeebled expressions
or the decadent Medieval imagination. This image of the French 15th century,
a battleground and graveyard oonveniently separating the "Mid:lle Ages" from
the "Renaissance", originates in the 16th century. Later elaborated and
given an air of finality by Ranantic and Positivist literary and cultural
historiographers, the SaIlE image remained for a long tine the rrost pe.rvasive
arrong the abusive fictions of traditional litercuy-historical mythography.
As a oonsequence, iIlportant aspects of the litercuy culture of the French
15th centu..ry have been inaccurately assessed, while others remain-eve.'1
today after the thorough-going reevaluation of the vitality and originality
of the fifteenth century by the late Franoo SiIrone-largely or totally 1
unexplored. This is especially true of the drama.
fure truly and closely than any other rreans of artistic expression,
the drama in the 15th century reflects the aspirations, preoccupations and 2
limitations of the society which p:>rtrays itself therein. And of all the
developrents in the literary culture of 15th century France, one of the rrost
significant is the creation of an entirely new form of drama: the p:>litical
rrorality play. An offshoot of the didactic rrorality play, it redefines the
social function of the theatre, perceived now for the first tine as an
ideological instnlrrent, a fonun for the propagation of militant partisan
religious and political doctrines. I shall briefly sketch how this invention
1
2
in the 15th century of a new dramatic form carre about, and, rrore iJrl:ortant,
how this st=eeific example of the vitality and originality of the 15th century
drama bears out Lanson's dimly perceived inference, cited above, concerning
the in;lortance of the theatre as "a basic elerrent typical of a whole
literary culture" -a culture not in decline, but !tOving fonvard with the
t:Ires, adapting and renolding traditional fonns and !lOdes of thought and
artistic expression to rreet the requirerrents of an age of fX)litical and
religious tunnoil, an age dominated on the one hand by the English wars
(Hundred Years War, 1337-1453) and the civil war (Amagnacs and l3ourguignons,
1407-1435) , on the other by the Great Schism (1378-1417), the conciliar
!tOvanent (Pisa 1409, Constance 1414-1418, Basel-Florence, 1431-42), and the
prerefonnation.
The first play to adapt the !tOtifs and dramatic conventions of the
Middle llqes in such a way as to pmnit the drama to confront the problems
of the wars in France and the tunroil in the Churcl1. was the ~ralite du 3
Concil de Basle. The play was written in 1434 by an anonynous French
churchIran, anxious to advance and defend the positions of the conciliarist
refomers in their struggles against the t:QPe at the Council of Basel, and
to urge the resolution of the Hundred Years War through trilateral negoti
ations (France, England and Burgundy) initiated and coordinated by the 4
p3ace-keeping delegations of the Council. The COncil de Basle recounts
in painstaking detail-and in the sarre style and often the sarre terms as
one finds in narrative YoOrks fran the sarre p3riod (Olristine de Pisan,
Jean de Montreuil, Alain C1artier, Jean Juvenal des Ursins etc.) -the dev
astation and suffering brought about by the war, and the problems and dangers
of the corruption and anarchy in the Churcl1 (also in the same tenns as one
finds in contemporary narrative "'Orks: concili.:rr treatises, se.rnons, f?aI11?hlets
3 5
etc.). The FOlitical rrorality play is thus a v.ork of creative synthesis,
bro~ht about by the canbination of disparate but already existing narra
tive and dramatic materials and techniques: lyricism, satire and FOlem.ic
fran diverse types of narrative poetry, propaganda from se.tnlOI1S, pamphlets,
juridical and eo::lesiological treatises-all bound together in a dramatiza
tion through the conventional use of allegorical personifications, both
collective (France, Eglise, Concil) and abstract (Paix, Pefonration-Justice,
He.resie). Daniel Poirion FOints out that this play, and others like it
(e.g. ~ carplainte du Povre Crnmm, 1435, by Michault Taillevant) reflect
very accurately not only the doctrinal FOsitions .of the French clericature, 6
but also the state of public opinion in France with respect to the v.'ar.
MJst irrportant, these plays reflect as well the vitality of a dramatic tra
dition evolving and renewing its rreans of ~ression and persuasion.
The irnFortance of t.11e ConcH ~ Basle in the history of French dramatic
literature has gone largely unnoticed. Grace Frank rrentions the play only 7
as an exarrple of an "historical rrorality", which it is not, or at least
was not when it was written; it is "historical" for us, not for the people
for whan it was written. The ConcH ~ Bas Je is a political play, written
to influence opinion in favor of the CDnciliar refonns of the Church, and
the conciliar solution to the problem of the war in France. The fact that
as early as 1434 (the ConcH ~ Easle is one of the earliest norality plays
known) it occurred to an author to use the frarrework of the edifying rroral
ity play for pllrfOses other than rroralistic or celebratory, is of i.1nrense
significance, marking a tw:ning FOint in the developrent of serious drama
in France. For the ConcH ~ Basle is the first in a long line of plays
belonging to the reformist theatre of the 15th and early 16th centuries,
4
a tradition which begins to rrerge by alrrost iIrperceptible doctrinal
ITUltations into the Protestant theatre (rrorality plays, farces and "trage:u.es") 8
of the mid- and later 16th centmy. The devel0trnent is unbroken and, indeed,
because many of the plays are undated, it is often difficult to tell from the
allusions they o:mtain whether they belong to the late pre-reformation or to
the early Fefooration. At any rate, no case need be ma:ie here for the inp:)r9
tance and iIrpact of the Protestant theatre in France. It is a theatre which 10
spans the entire 16th century and continues even into the early 17th.
M:>reover, the nurrber of Protestant plays far exceeds that of the learned
pseudo-classical plays of the Renaissance (Jcx:l.elle, La Taille, Garnier etc.) .
Finally, the power and efficacy of these plays is \\ell known, as Professor
I..el::legue IXlinted out, noting t.'1at a "Protestant theatre" is in itself a para
dox, since the Protestant reforrrers usually shunned dramatic representations
as bordering on idolatry. "En theorie, ils s I en rrefient et le consi.de.rent
CDme un divertisserrent dangereuxi en pratique, ils usent largerrent de ce 11
rroyen de propagande". In the same vein, G. Jonker concludes his stuiy of
~ protestantisrre ~ le theatre de ~ franc;aise .au...16e siecle with the
following 51.llmarY of his findings:
Avant la Reforrre proprerrent dite, le theatre a sotNent expri..rre le mecontenterrent de ceux qui voyaient les fautes de l' Eglise. Peu a peu les attaques deviennent plus violentes, on ne critique pas seulerrent les m:::eurs dissolues d'cme partie du clerge, rrais encore la doctrine. I.e theatre devient un rroyen de propagande considerable des idees nouvelles (p. 236).
Sorre 200 pages earlier, Jonker began by noting that "la premiere piece de
theatre qu I il convient de rrentionner est la Moralite du ConcHe de Bale. . "
(p. 4), and he is surely correct in placing the ConcH de 3asle at tre origins
of t."e ideological partisan draIT'a in France.
--------
5
~ precisely is "new" in the partisan ideoloqical play? Remarks ~ form, content and tone
As has been state:i, all of the formal and structural raw material (the
rrorality play with its allegorical characters) necessary for the mergence of
the partisan ideological play was present long before 1434, and yet no such
plays exist in French prior to the ConcH de Basle. Indee:i as early as the
13th century, satirical and polemical allusions and ideol9';ical elerrents
may be found in the drama, but the developrrent of political drama as an inde
pendent genre was, as we shall see, either nipped in the boo by historical
events, or inhibited by censorship, whether official or self-iItp:lsed. Nor
was there lacking, prior to 1434, the specific type of subject matter neces
sary for the errergence of the political drama, narrely a certain widespread
discontent of an id!:!ological nature which w:::>uld entail the delineation of op
posing constituencies. These two canplementary factors are the sine ~~
for there to be partisan political literature of any sort: an ideological split
(opposing doctrines) entail.in;r a polarization of the society, or significant
parts of the society, into adversary parties (opposing ccnstituancies). A
specific a:mbination of historical events in the 15th century precipitated the
crystallization of this subject rratter and these opposing constituencies, and
the partisan ideoloqical play, the oldest surviving example of its kind in
French, carre into being. But the subject rratter of the ConcH de Basle ',,'as
not new. The Hundred Years War dates from 1337, the Great Schism from 1378,
and the 12th, 13th and '14th centuries were certainly not devoid of partisan
conflicts; but they are de\.Did of drarna in which these conflicts appear. There
was, rroreover, no dearth of literature-narrative literature I not drama--devoted 12
to the SChism and the Hundred Years Har. Thus for the public of 1434 the
ConcH de Basle could not have seem::rl rrore than a slight deviation from the
6
normal rroralistic and satirical treatrrents (often hostile) of abuses in the
ecclesiastical and secular hierarchies.
This brings us, after fonn an:i content, to the third am rrost important
constituent elerrent characteristic of the ideological drama: tone. There
are irnportant distinctions which need to be drawn, first J::etween the various
types of satire an:i the various types of polemic, second. between polemic on
ti'..e one hand, propaqanda on the other. In the drama. of the 15th and 16th
centuries there is perceptible a definite rroverrent from gentle irony in the
satire of clerical foibles to bitter polemic directed against heresy,
sirrony, idolatry, "papelardise" and so on. Indeed one of the rrost ccrrrron
theIres in rredieval literature is the satire of licentious rronks and profli
gate priests. But "satire" is a tenn very broad in scope, it can be benev
olent or violent. Only when violent, and directed against a ~ific target,
does satire becorre synonyrrous '\lith polemic. And while there exists, from
the late 12th to the late 14th century, sore srrall arrount of anticlerical
and specifically antipapal pJle.mic, there is nuch less of t.lll.s vigorous
type of criticism than there is of satire. However the satire of the clergy,
fran the 13th to the 15th centuries, does bea::rne :rore virule."1t, less benev
olent, escalating at tiJTes to a genuine anticlericalisrn. This escalation in
the degree of satiric virulence is not merely a literary phenorrenon; it
corresp:>nds to-and is to sore extent a guage of-an evolving social reality.
The legislation which, throughout Europe in the 13th and 14th centuries,
limited or, prohibited gifts of land to the Church, points up the econcrnic
roots of much of the lay hostility tawaId the clergy. In an agrarian
economy, destabilized in a vicious circle by plague, famine and war (decreased
population bringing about labor shortages and vice versa), clerical endowrents
- - ------
7 13
ill the form of land holdings were strongly resented.. Also iJrportant in
this m:>varent, in the drama, towards a m:>re open and m:>re violent satire 14
of the clergy is the fact that by the end of the 14th century the activi
ty of writing and putting on non-liturgical plays falls m:>re and rrore into
the hands of clerks in the l~ law courts, and rranbers of the 10lYer
levels of the clergy-i. e. ,people in a position to be aware of abJ.ses, but
themselves not in a position to profit from them. Thus it corres as no
surprise that alongside the gentle mxking of priets and m:>nks familiar
from the farces (and already present in the fabliaux and the ~. de Renart,
not to rrention Boccacio and O1aucer), there arises, with worsening econanic
conditions and the general disgrace of the clergy following the Sdlisn and
all the reformist literature it generated, a nuch more virulent brand of
satire, genuinely polemical-in plays such as the Farce des Theolc:x:rastres,
la !·bralite de la Maladie de Olrestiente, la Moralite du Pane malade etc. ,
rrost of which figure arrong the plays discussed by Emile Picot in his study
entitied Les Moralit~s polenu.aues, ~ la a:mtroverse religieuse dans l' ancien 15
theatre fran@s.
'Ibis brings us to the distinction which needs to be drawn beboJee.'1 partisan
ideological plays (propaganda plays) arrl what Picot calls "polemical m:>rality
plays" . Picot used the term "polemical" sinply because it enabled him to
group together in a single category a large number of plays (28) which have
nothing other in camon than a high degree of critical satire (polemic). But
a polemical play is rot necessarily an ideological one, since polemic can be
personal, directed againstjIbdividUal, with no partisan or political overtones.
M. exarrple is the Jeu de la Feuillee, written around 1276 by Adam de la Halle.
In this play there appear certain discreet, veiled allusions directed against
the Count Robert d' Artois, and against certain corrupt and pOIYerful patricians
8
of Arras whom the Count Il'ai..ntained, or all""'ed to remain, in power.
But tbe allusions in question, while critical on the j?ersonal level,
even pJssibly fOlemical on the level of a srrall circle of initiates,
are rcore properly considered satirical, and in any case too discreet,
too veiled to nake of Adam, as one critic would have us believe, "le
porte-parole de 1 'opposition anti-praticienne de la rroyenne et petite
bourgeoisie arrageoise,... le ~te de l' extrere gauche des conmmards, 16
du parti de la revolte". There are otber plays ·Nhi.ch contain a certain
dose of ~rsonal polemic, e.g., La ~ des Theolo;rastres , but which
are also partisan in their destination. Partisan pJlemic, Le., pJlemic
generalized and belonging to a group with a definite (or definable)
ideological identity and directed against another group consciously opposed
to it, is synononous with propaganda. But while propaganda often e:'<!?resses
itself pJlanically, the reverse is not necessarily true; e.g., the MJralite
de La Paix ,de perol11".e (1468) is a Burgundian propaganda play, but :1ot at all
pJlernical. Conversely, the rrorality of Hypocrisie, Feintise ~ Faux Ser.'blant
(no. 3 in Picot's study) on the subject of the Pragmatique Sanction is pJlemical,
in that the inderdiction of the fete des fous pronoooced by Charles VII is
vigorously protested by the author of t.~ play. But since his protestations
are directed against local nanbers of the clergy and lllnited
in scope to tbe specific qu:stion of tbe interdiction of tbe rete ~ fous,
tbey are too parochial to constitute partisan propaganda; this is an example of
non-pJlitioal polemic. A play like the Nouveau ~ (00.6 in Picot), also on
tbe subject of the Pragmatique Sanction, is on the other hand a genuine partisan
ideological play, as are, in subject matter and scope, many but not all of the
other plays in Picot's MJralites pol6ni.ques. Beginning with the Concil de
Basle of 1434, Picot's selection offers a panorama mirroring the beginnings
9
and full blossaning of, on the one hand a reformist (not yet "Protestant")
c:msciousness, and, an the other, a conservative and obe:lient orthcrlox
consciousness. Those in the latter canp accuse their crlversaries of being
"novateurs" (revolutionaries), each side accuses the other of heresy, and
the theatre is the battleground (but not the graveyard) on which the
preliminary ideological skinnishes of the Refonration are reflected in a
new draIratic genre, the partisan ideological play, attesting to the origi
nality and vitality of the theatre in 15th century France.
The creators of the partisan ideological play in France in the 15th and
16th centuries were not bothered by the question of whether or not a work of
the creative imagination could be intentionally propagandistic and at the 17
sarre tiIrE a work of art. This is a problem for m::xlern scholastics. Far
rrore important is the fact that in the 15th and 16th centuries social problems
of the utITost seriousness, both j?ractical and philosophical (for ultimately at
stake was nothing less than salvation or darmation), could be formulated in
dramatic terms and portraye:i on a theater platfonn. RudiIrentary as many of
t.~ese plays appear from an aesthetic or dramaturgical viewpoint, their mere
existence testifies to the ilraginative vitality of a dramatic tradition usually
rerrerrbered in this period for its farces and sotties, often licentious and
amusing, more often banal, or for its sacred drama.(mystery plays, saints' lives,
edifying morality plays), usually pious, more often boring.
But that the tbeatre in the 15th century in France was not always
triVial, that it could vividly represent on a stage its own profoundly felt
dilenmas, that it could do so by rreans of dramatic conventions which were
10
not those of Porne or Greece, but which were its 0Nn, this is the particular
iIrportance of the plays I have described. To appreciate their
vitality as well as their seriousness (a seriousness underlying even the
rrost apparently frivolous of them), we must not be put off the track by
the allegorical convention. Obviously in a play characters such as Refornation,
Church, Peace and so on will appear strange and hopelessly abstract to an
au::lience steepaj as we are in conventions far different but no less arbitrary.
'!he attenpt must be made, hcwever, to see through the external superficial
trappings of dramatic convention to the human problems and rrotivations
beneath. To do this will enable us to participate in the life of an age
far different from our 0Nn, and yet very rruch the sarre on the deeper levels
of human conflict and suffering, where problems of rroral res~nsibility and
~litical coercion remain forever ~ise:i on the precarious seesaw of proVisional
solutions.
NOl'ES
1 See, in particular, Franco Sirrone, The French Renaissance, trans.
H. Gaston Hall (London: Maanillan, 1969), 01.. 3: "The Originality of the French Fifteenth century". SiIrone notes that Gustave Lanson, while generally accepting the prevailing view of a "decadence throu::Jhout the century", did, nonetheless, "stress the importance of the theatre over all the other literary genres active in the fifteenth century. In the fortune of the sacred and profane theatre, and nore in the latter than in the foDreI', Lanson already discerns -shrewdly, and follCMin:J the sch::>lars nost actively concerned with the problem at the tine- a basic elerrent typical of a whole literary culture" (pp. 117-118). '!his point was recently raised again by Professor ~ at the 22rxi CoIJ;1ress of the Association Intemationale des Etudes Fran~s. AddressiIq himself to PJ:cfessor sinone, organizer and president o~ session devoted to "1' Originalit~ du XVe siecle", he began as follCMS: "Dans le programne d' auj oord 'hui, il y a un vide que j e remarque, . . • il n' a pas e~
question d J une Partie extl:anemant inportante de la littfu-ature du XVe si~cle: le tMatre. Sur ce ~tre, j' ai prof~ des jugarents assez sev~es autrefois. . . . Je crois que, si je reecmren~ aujourd'hui, . . . je ne serais pas aussi s~~e. J I admire maintenant la valeur de ce ~tre, oon etannante vari~, oon eventail dep.ll.s la sottie jusqu'aux myst~es, . . . et j e vwdrais signaler toutes les ~ces de norali~ : les farces noralis~, les norali~ histori.ques etc. Je crois que rarerrent en France le theatre a ~~ aussi prosp€!re qu' ~ cette E!poque-U. . . ." '!he CDIPlete discussion is printed in the Cahiers de 1 J AIEF (CAIEF), XXIII, (1971), 345-348, and followed up in rro...--e detail inI'i'"Traditions renouvel~ et syn~ c:reatrices: l' originali~ du ~tre au XVe siecle", in Mtllanges . . . Franco SiIrone, edd. Gianni 1-Dnbello and Lionello sozzi (Turi11, fortha::rtlin;).
2 "Une ~ n I est bien connue que si l' on cannait bien les choses
que cette ~poque a partiOllierarent aimees. Qui saura la passion du M:Jyen ]v;e pour son th~tre, sera pret ~ c:onvenir que, si l' on ignore ce theatre, on ignore en mane taIps une partie considerable du r-byen Age. . . . Ie M:lyen Age, au noins dans sa ~ence, s'est peint dans ce vaste tableau. L'histoire des noeurs et des icMes au XVe s~cle n' a pas de source plus aborrlante" (Petit de Jullevi11e, La CcrOOdie et les rcoeurs en France au rroyen-§ge ['paris, 1886], pp. 4-5):"" Jean Frappier, sana 80years later, echoed this sentilrent:"Plus que les autres genres, le tb.eatre peut refl~ter la r~~ socia1e, les rapports et conflits des classes, la 'riote du m:mde I, pour reprendre une expression rredievale que Charles-Victor Langlois traduisait avec bonheur par la 'mel€!e sociale'" (Le 'lbe.atre orofane en France ~ rroyen-age ~aris, 19651, pp. 4-5). -
11
12 3 I.e Concil de Basle (1434): les ongmes du tMatre refonniste et
partisan ~ France. Edition, introduction, glossaire et notes critiques par Jonathan Beck, prMace de Daniel Poirion (Iei.den: Brill, forthCXJlllin3' in 1978 in the series "Studies in the Hi.sto~ of Qlristian ThoU;ht") .
4 On the role of the council of Basel in the peace negotiaticns, see
J. G. Dickinson, '!he Congress of Arras of 1435, ~~ in Medieval Diplomacy (OXford, 1955), in particular pp. 78-79, 86-87, 202; and Joseph Gill, Constance et Bale-Florence (t. IX in l'Histoire des conciles ~~, gen. ed.G. Dunei.ge [Paris, 1965J L, p. 193: "La paix d'Arras fut poor une gram.e part l' oeuvre du concile Lde ~e]. Mais ce demier etendit egalarent son action bienfaisante ~ plusieurs pays: l'Espagne par exanple, aussi bien qua l'Angleterre et l'Allenagne. DI autres dernan~ent
sen aide: la Lituanie en conflit avec la Pologne .. "etc.
5 References in Beck, "La ItDralite du Concil de Basle: 'pol6nique'
tneatrale au propagande?", Actes du IIe Colloaue International sur le tMatre rrAli~val, Alen90n, 10-14 ]iU.TIet 1977, ed. J .~. Payen-.--
6 Op. cit. supra n. 3, p. vi.
7 '!he ~eval Frendl Drama (OXford, 1954), p. 248.
8 See Fritz Hall, Das r;olitisdle und reli~se Tendenzdrarra des 16en
Jahrhunderts in Frankreich (Er1angen, 1903), Gerard Jonker, I.e Protestantisrre et le t..'leatre de langue franc;:aise ~ :<VIe siecle (Paris-,-1939).
Q See, in partiallar, Rayrrond I.ebegue, La TragErlie religieuse ~ France
(Paris, 1929).
10 La tragalie ::J.e Franc;:ois ~, attributed to Joseph Dudlesne, was
published in 1608. "Clest un avertissarent aux Protestants de ne pas abjurer leur religion came le fit Franyois Spera", concludes Jonker, following Hall (p. 94, n. 4).
II Jonker p. 1 (fran I..ebE'!gue, op. cit., p. 290 n. 1).
12 See "Secular Literature in France in the Age of the Great Schism and
the Conciliar ~anent", in "'The Great Chain of :¥'S" After Fortv Years, edd. Paul and Marion Kuntz (Kalarrazoo: ~~e L"1Stitute~rtliCX)ming).
13 13
'!bus it was, writes Denys Hay, that lithe e.ndoI-.!tent of the Church after 1300 was a rrere trickle of what it had been before 1200. And it went with sporadic atterrpts by layrren to reoover or at any rate to enjoy dlurch lands II ("The Background to the Feformation II in The Feformation ~, eel. Joel Hurstfield [New York, 1965J, p. 16).
14 Described here is a general trend, not an absolute pro;ressive
harderUng of playwrights' attitudes teMard the clergy. In general the satire of priests and m:R'lks beo::mes rrore harsh and bitter as the Feformation approaches and progresses, but the rrore violent polemics do not entirely replace the older, rrore benevolent satire which is not at all refonnist in spirit. Exanples of this gentler type of satire in plays fran the 15th and 16th centuries are La Farce du OJria, La Farce du Savetier, I.e Semon joyeux des Quatre Vents (nOS". ~18""7aii02'51 m the Mpertoire of Petit de JUI'leville).
15 Bulletin de la soci~~ de l' histoire du orotestantisrre franc;ais,
XXX\'I (1887), XLI lI892). Theoollected articies were reprinted as a IrOnograph by Slatkine in 1970.
16 Marie Ungureanu, La Bourgeoisie naissante: soci~~ et litterature
oourgooise d'Arras ~.XIIe et XIIre si~cles (Arras, 1955), pp. 229-230, 204. In the course of the play Adam ideritifies Fort:l.Jne, both good and bad (syrrbolizeel by the Wheel), with "being in good with the Coont" ("bien estre du oonte"), w. 790, 798. The allusicns are clear, but
do not betray the kind of rcrlicalism Ungureanu attributes to Adam. l-bre plausible explanations have been offered. See, e.q., Jean Dufournet in Ibrnania, UOOOTI (1965), 199-245. Jean-charles Payen recently added his voice to those (nunerous, at tines rauoous) refuting or m::x3erating Ungureanu's vision of Adam. Prof. Payen' s note on "1' IdSologie dans le Jeu de la feuillee" appeared i..!'1. Ronania, XCIV (1973), 502-503.
17 Fecently, the rrost vehement condeImations of the partisan ideologi
cal play have care from the pen of Eugene Ionesoo, notably in a polemical exchange he calls the "Controverse londonienne" (Notes et contrenotes [Paris, 1966J, pp. 137-164). In a rather doctrinaire fonnulation of "1e role du dramaturge", Ionesco affi..rms that ''tme oeuvre d' art n I a rien a voir avec les doC'"..rines. J'ai ~ja ~t ailleurs [see, e.g., pp. 22, 40-41, 55-58, 173, 192J qu'tme oeuvre d'art qui ne serait qu'idOOlogique, et rien d'autre, serait inutile, tautologique, inferieure a: la doctrine dent elle se reclarterai.t et qui trouverait rreilleure expression [?] dans le langage de la d&roristration et du disrours. Une piike ~logi.que n'est rien d'autre qIl9 la w1.garisation d'une ideologie" (p. 141). Ianesoo does allcw, hoNever, that certain ideological ~rks may also be works of art, to the extent to which they transcend their ideological
14
content: "Tolls les auteurs ont voulu faire de la propagande. Les grands sont ceux qui ont ~~, qui, consci.eIment au non, ont a~
a des reali~ plus proforxles, plus universelles" (p. 55). Is the influence waning of those who hold views similar to Ionesco' s in the Cebate Over the (in) ~tibility of ideology and literary art? Such is the assessment of Erich KOhler, speaking fran the vantage point of his long experience with the question in various ap:>lications: ''Die Ansicht, dass auch 'schOne' Literatur sehr '-'Ohl mit politisd1.-ideologisd1er Dienstieistung zu tun haben kann, mag vielen noch inmer als 1JIlziemlich ersd1einen. Dar Unstand, dass sich in dieser Fraga seit sehn Jahren ein ge'lisser Wandel der M!inungen vollzieht, eIIl1Utigt mich, rreine These [in this case, the thesis "das anglanoDllaI'1Ili.schangevinische KOnigtum habe nicht nur die pseucbhistorische Artuslegende der Chroniken, sondem aud1. die Artusliteratur bewusst in den Dienst einer politisd1.en Propaganda gestellt] grundsatzlich aufrechtzuerhalten" (Ideal und Wirklid'lkeit in ~ hOfischen~, Beibefte zur ZRPh, Heft 97, 2, erganzte Auflage LTUbingen: Max Nierreyer Verlag, 1970J, pp. 266-67.
Thory University
I L_~._.1. '_'.' -.
