German Literature in English Translation

THE FINAL IS SCHEDULED FOR TUESDAY, DEC.  17, 9:00 AM.

The final will consist of a set of short answer questions and three essays.

The short answer questions will cover major characters, plot elements, authors, and so forth. There will be an emphasis on Willehalm and Parzival, but any of the works we have read may be covered. I will expect you to remember somewhat more detail from Willehalm and Parzival than from works read earlier. But all the questions will deal with major elements. For example, I might ask "what was the sin of Gregorius's parents?" But I would not ask "what was the name of the abbott of the monastery where Gergorius was raised?" or "where was the silk made, in which the infant Gregorius was wrapped?" I do not believe in "trick quesions." But would it be a "trick" if I asked "who wrote the Nibelungenlied?"

You will have a number of essay topics to choose from. You will be required to choose one topic dealing primarily with Willehalm, one dealing primarily with Parzival, and one dealing with multiple works. As always, the goal in these essays is to develop a well-defined and clearly stated thesis, and to argue it clearly, with clearly-stated evidence from the texts under discussion, and a clear conclusion. The best essay is one that reflects your own thought and your own effort to understand the texts under study, rather than merely repeating things said in class discussion.

For Willehalm, a number of "things to think about" are outlined below.
For Parzival, you should review and think about the points raised by the various reading questions and the "writing assignment."
For the works of Hartmann, the Nibelungenlied and the Hildebrandslied, review the earlier essay assignments and exam.

Some questions may provide an opportunity to include some discussion of the Hildebrandslied, but those of you who joined the class late and missed that text do not need to worry about it now.
I do not expect to write any questions that specifically mention the Nibelungen films, although it may be possible to include some discussion of them in some essays if you wish.
 
 

Willehalm: things to think about.

1. Many or most of the other works we have read begin with prologues, some very brief, that give some indication of what the work is about and what its main themes are. Willehalm, on the other hand, begins with a prayer. What are the effects of beginning with a prayer? What does this beginning tell or suggest to readers about how to read Willehalm or about what they should expect to get out of the work? What other kinds of prefatory materials does Wolfram offer at the beginning of Willehalm? How do these things, perhaps in combination with the prayer, prepare readers for the experience of the work?

2. Willehalm is said to be a saint. What does this mean? What has he done to make him saintly? A little background is necessary: the two main ways to become a saint in the Catholic church are and were to be a martyr, or to display “heroic virtue” in life. Vivianz, for example, clearly dies as a martyr. But Willehalm is not a martyr. (You could try to argue that Wolfram would have had Willehalm die if he had finished the book, but this would go against the evidence of the historical Willehalm, the French Willehalm poems, and the German sequel to Wolfram’s Willehalm.) So he must have displayed heroic virtue? What did he do that was so great as to earn him sainthood?

3. On the other hand, Willehalm is also said to have sinned in such a way as to risk damnation. What did he do that was so bad? Some possible answers follow, along with some very brief arguments for and against each one (but I have not tried to list every possibility).
 a. Willehalm commits no particular sin, but he is tainted like all humans by original sin. But then, if that’s it, why did he run any particular risk of damnation, and wouldn’t his death in combat with the heathens earn him the Crusader’s martyrdom?
 b. Willehalm’s sin is not one particular act, but the mental or spiritual state of anger. Anger or rage is one of the seven deadly sins. And Willehalm certainly spends a good deal of the book angry. He thus risks dying in a sinful state. Willehalm’s anger might thus be seen as parallel to Parzival’s doubt as a sinful state that has to be overcome. Against that, one might note that while “doubt” was mentioned prominently in the prologue to Parzival, “anger” is not mentioned in a similar place in Willehalm.
 c. Wolfram might want us to think that all killing in war is sinful. Evidence for this might be found in the sentence on p. 22, where the narrator says that the proper name for the “chivalry” performed on the battlefield of Alischanz is “slaughter.” The original German word might also be translated as “murder,” though that translation probably has moral connotations that the original did not.
 d. The killing of Arofel, after his opponent was thoroughly defeated and had asked for mercy, might be Willehalm’s sin. It certainly seems to violate the rules of chivalry as laid down in Parzival. But, for one thing, the rules in Parzival probably provide a loophole, and for another thing, the passage on p. 22, beginning “Whatever I recounted earlier about fighting . . . ,” may well mean that the rules of Parzival are irrelevant in Willehalm.

4. How are the “heathens” and the conflict between the Christians and the “heathens” presented in Willehalm? Much European literature of Wolfram’s era, more or less inspired by the Crusades, seems to take the position that “heathens” simply don’t deserve to live--that it is a good thing for Christians to kill heathens in limitless numbers and without any mercy. Is Willehalm like this? The other extreme would be a notion of “tolerance” that says killing people because of their faith or background is absolutely wrong. Does Willehalm take this stance? Does Wolfram condemn, criticize, or regret the war he depicts? Some concrete points to consider include but are by no means limited to the following.
 a. The death of Vivianz with the sweet smell (p. 48), and the angel (p. 46), and so forth, is a typical martyr’s death, suggesting a heavenly reward for Vivianz (and thus the rightness of what he is doing in fighting the heathens?).
 b. The death of the heathen Tesereiz (p. 56) is also said to have been accompanied by sweet smells, and Tesereiz is described as a “burgeoning branch of Love” (p. 56). Can heathens somehow be martyr saints too?
 c. The fatal wounding of Vivianz, where Noupatriz’s banner, with its image of Cupid or “Amor,” passes through Vivianz’s body (and Vivianz would be wearing the sign of the cross, see p. 25), might be seen symbolically as the martyrdom of Christian love at the hands of “pagan love,” whatever that might mean.
 d. Gyburc makes a long speech (pp. 155-57), in which she asks the Christian knights to show mercy to the heathens. A careful reading of this speech might tell us a lot about Wolfram’s attitudes, but do be careful and do read the whole speech. Paying attention only to the slogan-like phrase “spare the creatures of God’s hand” (p. 155) might be quite misleading.

5. What is the role of love in Willehalm? Some passages to consider have already been mentioned above. In some ways, both the Christians and the “heathens” are presented as fighting in the service of Love. In some important ways, however, they may be presented as serving different kinds of love. Consider also the relationship between Willehalm and Gyburc, and/or the various family relationships depicted.