In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

Ulrich Plenzdorf's Die neuen Leiden des jungen w.: The Death of aFool D.G . JOHN Since its immensely successful premiere engagement at the Landestheater Halle on 18 May 1972, Ulrich Plenzdorf's Die neuen Leiden des jungen W. (The New Sorrows ofYoung w.) has provoked more interest than any German play within recent memory.' Its protagonist, Edgar Wibeau, is a young citizen ofthe German Democratic Republic who hasdropped outof society, apparently rejecting the fundamental socialist principles of collective work and communal responsibility. Despite the fact that Edgar refers to himself repeatedly as "Ich, Idiot," he has been taken seriously by audiences both in his native land and in the West as a critic of contemporary society. Naturally the most energetic discussions about Edgar's social and political views have come from within the GDR. Indeed, in a state where the author's pen is guided by the censor, it is difficult to understand how a play that caused such furore ever came into the spotlight. The debate touched off by this irreverent teenager is one that was bound to deal with some basic tenets of GDR socialism; moreover, if Edgar's attitudes and opinions are correctly taken to be representative of GDR youth, then he must be seen as an indicator of widespread dissatisfaction with present conditions and perhaps a herald of significant social change. Friedrich Karl Kaul is one who protests vehemently against this interpretation . In a letter to Wilhelm Gimus, editor of Sinn und Form, Kaul objects indignantly to the play's political connotations and to the defilement of the treasured literary classic from which Edgar quotes with such audacity: "mich ekelt geradezu - urn keinen anderen Ausdruck zu benutzen - die von einem unserer professionellen Theaterkritiker sogar noch 'mehr als ein hubscher Einfall' laudierte Inbezugsetzung eines verwahrlosten - der Fachmann wurde sagen 'verhaltensgestorten' - Jugendlichen mit der Goetheschen Romanfigur an...." 2 Kaul continues: "Man komme nieht mit der Binsenwahrheit, daB es derart verhaltensgestorte Jugendliche bei uns gibt, worliber gerade ich durch Bernf und spezielles Fachinteresse besonders gut unterrichtet sein durfte. Naturlich gibt es sie, und natlirlich bin ich darliber unterrichtet! Aber dank der 34 D.G. JOHN energischen MaBnahmen unseres Staates sind sie alles andere als reprasentativ fiir unsere Jugend!"3 In their discussion of Kaul's letter and Plenzdorf 's play, several other prominent persons in the GDR present an entirely different point of view. Robert Weimann examines the play in the light of its dependence on Werther and sees it as the continuation of a literary legacy with new significance for the modem socialist state and its citizens4 Ernst Schumacher places the emphasis elsewhere: "Ich meine demgegeniiber, daB das Interesse an Plenzdorfs Arbeit in vieI stiirkerem MaBe dadurch bedingt und bestimmt ist, daB sich hier ein junger Mensch von hier und heute in der Sprache der heutigen jungen Generation artikuliert." He continues: "Urn es zugespitzt zu sagen: Diese vomehmlich JUDgen Zuschauer hat ungleich mchr interessiert, wie sich Edgar iiber blue jeans und iiber die Beziehungen zum anderen Geschlecht und iiber seinen Lehrmeister, seine Mutter und seine Kollegen von der Malerbrigade ausliiBt, als seine Kommentare zum 'Werther' .'" Judging from the accolades heaped upon the play by the youth of the GDR,. Schumacher is right. Yet the contrasting opinions above suggest that the play and its protagonist can be reasonably interpreted in morc than onc way and on more than one level. Still. whether Edgar Wibeau is seen as simply a figure of fascination for GDR youth, as their representative. as an elucidator of literary tradition within its socialist context, or as a defiler of Goethe's hallowed name, there is no doubt that his existence leads to the fundamental question posed by Horst Schonemann in his contribution to the above discussion: "Das Stiick wirft die Frage auf, welchen Typ eines jungen sozialistischen Menschen wollen wir: den, der sich gut einfiigt, anpaBt, den, der uns Erwachsenen, Erziehern und Leitern gar keinen Arger macht, der fUr uns der Bequeme ist ... oder brauchen wir fiir die weltweiten Kampfe der Zukunft die kampferische Personlichkeit, die sich im sozialistischen Kollektiv zu optimieren gelernt hat?,,7 It is to this question that the following discussion is primarily addressed. Plenzdorf's play must be examined first...

pdf

Share