Let's read "Werther"

[truehobbit]

I must say I'm in the mood for a group read again.

And if I get to suggest something, I'm of course picking something German.

I'll take suggestions, too, though - for example, I remember Jny saying at some point that she'd always meant to read Faust, so we could read that if you prefer.

The reason I picked "The Sorrows of Young Werther" is because
- there are cheap paperback editions in English (same for Faust, though )
- it's a classic and a seminal work of its time
- it still seems to appeal to young people today
- it's really short (about 170 pages or so)

A problem might of course be using different translations, but I guess we won't go into detail that much.

So - anyone interested? In any group read at all? One of these suggestions in particular?

[Jnyusa]

I'm up for Werther again!

Eventually I do want to read Faust, but that's probably too ambitious a place to start.

*resolves to locate Werther paperback on bookshelves today, where ever it has migrated to, or to buy a new copy*

[truehobbit]

Wow, you read it before?

I guess if you're willing to read it again, you must have liked it some.

I don't think anything is too ambitious for this lot , but, yes, I thought that maybe people would sooner be interested in a short novel than a long play.

[Crucifer]

I'm game. Who's it by?

[truehobbit]

Ooops, I forgot to say.

It's by Johann Wolfgang Goethe, published 1774. It's about a young man who, we would probably say today, is still trying to 'find himself'. He meets a girl, and the two find they are 'kindred spirits' - but, as Shakespeare already knew, "the course of true love never did run smooth"... (Or is it true love? Something for us to discuss, I guess. )

The book is written in the course of the fashion for sensitivity and epistolary novels, such as those written by Rousseau and Richardson, and as such is told in the form of letters written by Werther to a friend.

There are also some autobiographical elements in it (though I don't think that's terribly important), and it is a major text in the literary fashion called "Sturm und Drang" (which I find is typically translated as "storm and stress", although "stress" is really a strange choice of word for "Drang", which really means "urge") - the idea of the movement was to express and give range to natural and strong emotions, rather than bridling them under the demands of reasonable behaviour.

I've found an English version online in Project Gutenberg: http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/2527

And here's what sounds like a cool idea:
You can be Werther's friend and receive one of his letters each day by e-mail.
http://www.the-sorrows-of-young-werther.com
(Although I wonder what happens towards the end, when the story isn't told in letters exclusively anymore - the story reaches a point where letters would not have been very realistic, so the "editor" of the letters needs to tell part of it.)

[Crucifer]

So it's a little bit Wagnerian? A big bit, even?

[Primula Baggins]

Generally I see "Sturm und Drang" translated as "Sturm und Drang."

I've never read Goethe, but I have a terrible record with group reads and don't dare make any promises.

[truehobbit]

So it's a little bit Wagnerian? A big bit, even?

No, not at all - Wagnerian style wasn't invented, then.
I guess, you could say they are both unhappy - but that's where the similarity ends.
It's a bit like saying Shakespeare is a lot like Shaw because they are both playwrights.

(I wonder, what was it that I said in my previous post that put you in mind of Wagner? )

But maybe I just don't see a connection because I've learned to view the two as so far apart - if on reading it you still see Wagnerian elements, that would be fascinating to discuss.

Generally I see "Sturm und Drang" translated as "Sturm und Drang."

That's certainly the most precise translation. (But what good is it, if the reader doesn't know the meaning of any of the words. )

I've never read Goethe,

About time, then!

but I have a terrible record with group reads and don't dare make any promises.

Ah, but this one is really, really short - you'll have read it before you have time to lose track.

[Crucifer]

Wagner was Sturm und Drang though...

[truehobbit]

Oh, no, he wasn't! The Sturm and Drang period only lasted a very short time during the last third of the 18th century, and although you can say that it helped give rise to Romanticism, it was basically superseded by Classicism.
Wagner started seriously composing in the 1830s.
You could however say that the way Wagner felt 'driven' to give in to the urges of his genius etc corresponds very much to what the authors of Sturm and Drang saw as the need of the individual genius to express itself etc.

[Primula Baggins]

Actually, "Sturm und Drang" is mostly used in English to mean "a dramatic fuss." "She presented her demands to the committee and there was a lot of Sturm und Drang, and the upshot was. . . ."

Thank you, hobby, for teaching me a more precise meaning!

[elfshadow]

I feel so uncultured, the only time I've ever heard of Sturm and Drang was when reading about JK Rowling. Durmstrang School of Witchcraft and Wizardry! The name is a play on Sturm und Drang of course. I never knew what the phrase really meant, thanks Hobby!

I will definitely try to read this novel, but I have never been too good at keeping up with group reads. It does sound interesting and I have always wanted to read Goethe, so I will do my best!

[Crucifer]

Wagner may have been post-Sturm und Drang, but his Operas most certainly showed many aspects of the style.

I do not live in the baroque era, yet most of the music I write can be classified as baroque. (Not neo baroque. That's slightly different. This is real, old baroque)

[truehobbit]

Actually, "Sturm und Drang" is mostly used in English to mean "a dramatic fuss." "She presented her demands to the committee and there was a lot of Sturm und Drang, and the upshot was. . . ."

Ooooh, I didn't know that, Prim!
I would have understood the idea if I'd seen it somewhere, even though I find it somewhat beside the point (probably from being more familiar with the historical use of the term than any popular one) - the words do give an idea of passionate uproar, and of course it wasn't long before the idea of a person going through passionate uproar for self-expression was thoroughly discredited, and the concept ridiculed - which would be mirrored in such a usage. (Plus, of course, the fact that the words alone must seem 'funny' to English-speakers.)
Still, to me it reads like saying: She presented her demands to the committee and there was a lot of Romanticism,...

Durmstrang School

I'd never noticed that! Cool!
Durmstrang is the one Krum belongs to, right?

Do join, elsha! It's a very short book, and although the language will at times seem a bit convoluted, I think the concepts are eternal and descriptive of feelings everybody will recognise.

Wagner may have been post-Sturm und Drang, but his Operas most certainly showed many aspects of the style.

I do not live in the baroque era, yet most of the music I write can be classified as baroque. (Not neo baroque. That's slightly different. This is real, old baroque)

Good point, Crucifer.
However, I think that Wagner's passionateness (if there is any) could more properly be said to belong to the Romantic period? I don't know a lot of Wagner, I must admit. The few things that come to mind when I think of him aren't even passionately romantic, but very much 'under control'. So I'm still curious to hear what aspect of Wagner you find to be like "Sturm and Drang".
"Sturm and Drang" proper was taken up in all the arts, and there are a number of pieces of music especially associated with it, symphonies by the Bach sons and Haydn, for example. It's a comparable movement to Sensibility in England in its effect on all the arts.
For a close musical comparison, you might want to listen into those pieces and compare them to Wagner.
Though, if it's basically an adoration for individuality and genius, and a glorification of feeling, impressions and responses to nature, I guess you could well say that that's something Sturm and Drang, Romanticism and Wagner have in common.

(Btw, you've mentioned your music-making, and you even compose - is there a way to hear your work? )

[Crucifer]

Hmmmm... Not really. Unless you want to come over some Sunday in Summer to hear some choral music. The midi files are appalling.

Hmmm... I think I've been wrongly taught. Wagner bears little or no resemblance to C.P.E. Bach, etc.

[Jnyusa]

Werther is a very easy read, for those who fear Goethe for his name alone!


(Hobby, yes, I've already read it. It's one of those books that one must read. I'm only ashamed that it's the only work of Goethe that I've read.)

The exciting part comes from the fact that the woman in the story is married to someone else, and does not know that Werther is hopelessly in love with her. So it is not just a love story ... it's quite an interesting presentation of a certain kind of character who has leisure to build fantasies that are quite independent of reality. The publication corresponds roughly to the beginning of the end of monarchy in Europe and the rise of the merchant class, so there's a bit of parallel between Werther's 'love-sickness' and the general malaise of his class, though I don't know if Goethe actually intended that.

*Found my book. Am ready to go!*

[Crucifer]

I haven't got a book yet. Feel free to go ahead, as I have to go away on Friday.

[truehobbit]

Jny, she isn't married yet, just engaged. (Or, IIRC, even only 'about to be engaged'.)

But in past times, that was as much as married, of course.

Crucifer, you could use the e-text I linked to above? Will you be away for long?

But I think Jny just meant to stress that she found her book, not that we should start instantly.
(I need at least to sum up who's in on this, and in what chunks we proceed. )

And it would be cool if we could get into class-issues here, too.

[elfshadow]

I was just curious, Hobby, for the sake of not sounding too unintelligent should I ever need to talk about this novel aloud ...what is the proper pronunciation of "Werther"? I'd assume that it's not pronounced how I would phonetically pronounce it (since it's in a different language from English and all ) but maybe I'm just overthinking things.

[truehobbit]

That's an excellent question, elsha!

Not that it would hinder you from understanding it, but it should certainly sound a bit different from what the 'typical' English pronunciation would probably be in my estimation.
I.e. the first vowel sound is not like in 'pert' but a bit like the vowel sound in "men", only a little longer (the exact same vowel sound doesn't exist in English), and the "th" is not a "th" but just a "t". The second syllable would sound very much like in British English, I think (i.e. not sounding the final 'r' sound). (The stress is on the first, like it would be in English.)

So, I'm counting you in, right?