Literary Ink in the Veins of God: Misotheism, Atheism or Eutheism.
| Author | Warkentin, Erwin John |
| Position | Forum on Public Policy |
Introduction
After the trauma of defeat and the destruction of its cities, Germany stood at more than one crossroad. The German survivors of the Second World War reconsidered whether a simplistic faith in an eutheistic "Marchenbuchliebergotf' was still a tenable model for post-war German religious life. The discussion was pulled out of the private sphere when Wolfgang Borchert demanded an answer from God regarding his apparent silence during the horrors of the Second World War at the end of Draussen vor der Tur, Borchert's one published play, which still ranks as the most performed post-war play in Germany.
Borchert, with a slim published oeuvre, investigates the many facets of God through his wartime experiences and the consequences he faced upon his return to his home in Hamburg. As such, Borchert's literary production will occupy a central position in this paper. An explication of his literary treatment of God and theological concepts will demonstrate that Borchert came to the conclusion that the traditional concepts of a loving God gives humans a convenient excuse for their brutality. Moreover, it will argue that the God concept that Borchert establishes is ineffable and can only be found in the act of searching; a deistic, panentheistic vision of God that rejects the revelations of religion and theology.
Rethinking Borchert's Theology
Until relatively recently, Borchert's Draussen vor der Tur, short stories, and poetry have remained firmly anchored in the literary classification of Trummerliteratur, a term that most often ensures that it is regarded as being of little import to the modern reader. It is only recently that scholars, such as Alexander Koller, have begun to free Borchert's works from being interpreted from within the confines a single historical context and consider whether their meaning and impact transcend the time and place of their creation. It is with this fresh perspective that Borchert's God concept will be investigated. Peter Ruhmkorf, (2) Karl Migner, (3) Hans Popper, (4) Evelyn Albinson, (5) Sydney Krome, (6) Bernhard Balzer, (7) and Claus Schroder (8) use Borchert's purported atheism as a starting point for their interpretation of the various God-figures in Borchert's works. However, this supposition is not based on any clear statement found in Borchert's works that declares his atheism, but on the assertion that Borchert represents a nihilistic world view expressed in an introductory statement often associated with his play: "Eine Injektion Nihilismus bewirkt oft, dass man aus lauter Angst wieder Mut zum Leben bekommt," (9) which was stricken from the later printed version. This line is then associated with the dialogue in Draussen vor der Tur between the old God, represented by a pathetic old man on the verge of a nervous breakdown, and the purported new God, Death, personified as a gluttonous mortician. Here the old God declares Death to be the new God in whom everyone now believes, suggesting that the theology in Borchert's works is a form of dystheism, maltheism, or cacodaemonism. This was interpreted as evidence of Borchert's atheism, ignoring indications to the contrary in the texts.
While most of the early scholarship posits a God concept that argues for an atheistic reading of Borchert's works, it is undermined by the very fact that Borchert includes God as a character in many of his works, even if one could argue that this God is simply a human construct. Louise Woodard goes so far as to suggest that Borchert allowed for the existence of God, but that Borchert was an antitheist. (10) This position is related to Sydney Krome's suggestion that, if Borchert did indeed allow for the existence of a God, then it was quite possible that God was maltheistic or at best deistic in nature.
More recent scholarship suggests that the God figures are either Jungian archetypes, as in Kurt Fickert's interpretation, (11) or simply allegorical figures as suggested by Alexander Koller (12) and Gordon Burgess. (13) This approach allows for the existence of God as a narrative device without a consist portrayal of God. Each is essentially a "one-off' that cannot be understood in relation to the other occurrences within Borchert's complete works. In this way they are able to avoid a systematic exposition of how the various God figures relate to one another.
While the majority of scholarship suggests Borchert used his allusions to God to bolster his supposed atheism, there are a few who have countered with theories that allow for Borchert's belief in a God. As already noted above, Krome allows for deism as an explanation for the silence of Borchert's God, a position that is supported by Albrecht Weber (14) and Hans Popper. This, however, is challenged by the fact that the human characters in both Draussen vor der Tur and the short stories are able to enter into a pseudo dialogue with God, or the figures that represent God, though they may, or may not, know they are in conversation with God. That is, an actual dialogue, not one where the characters simply talk past one another, takes place when the human character is not aware that he is in conversation with God, who has taken human form.
In spite of the fact that most early scholars took the view that Borchert was writing from a negative viewpoint, there was a small group of critics that interpreted Borchert's God as positive. Bernhard Meyer-Marwitz, (15) Helmut Christmann, (16) and Robert Pichl (17) have suggested that Borchert's God offers hope to those who experience Him with childlike faith. This, however, is problematic in that their interpretations limit themselves to a single short story and do not offer a comprehensive explanation of Borchert's theology.
There is one further possible approach to Borchert's God that allows for a silent God, but not one that is as detached as that found in deism. James Stark concentrated his research on the social environment from which Borchert's works emerged. Though he limits himself to a single short story, "Die Hundeblume," he does offer a unique perspective that is helpful when applied more broadly. Stark suggests that Borchert's God is to be found within the life which surrounds and permeates the individual. He further maintains that Borchert redefines God, "[as] a life force under the control of that which is living." (18) a sentiment that is echoed by Olivia Gabor. (19) In coming to this conclusion, Stark suggests that the God-concept found in Borchert's works is an expression of humanity's own highest aspirations. One is also left to ponder the question of whether what Borchert is doing is developing a panentheistic vision of God along the lines suggested by Charles Hartshorne. (20)
A Re-evaluation of Borchert's God
The discussions related to the nature of Borchert's God have lain dormant in Germany's literary discourse, with the occasional reiteration of the conclusions reached in the early deliberations of Borchert's literary significance. However, in recent years, Germans born after the war have begun to re-evaluate the literature of the period and in particular the notion that Borchert's works as a necessary balm that allowed the survivors of the war to heal from its trauma.
Borchert has been labelled the spokesman of the "lost generation," because he articulated the emotions of a generation that, for the most part, was unable to fully elucidate its circumstances. A generation that found itself in the midst of death, destruction, and hopelessness. This designation, though well-intended and meant as a tribute, carries with it the stigma of a writer whose works are fixed in time and space, unable to be relevant beyond its immediate temporal and spatial surroundings.
Though Borchert cannot be considered a minor post-World War II German author, the fact that his works are associated with what is sometimes derisively labelled Trummerliteratur (21) has led many literary scholars in Germany to conclude that his work is one dimensional, simplistic, and unworthy of more than superficial analysis. An additional difficulty is that Borchert's only published play, Draussen vor der Tur, an expressionistic Stationendrama that depicts the dying hallucinations of a guilt-obsessed soldier, and a few of his other short stories have been adopted by Germany's educational system as the quintessential works that sum up the literary milieu of post-war Germany. This has left the impression that Borchert's material is easily understood and best suited for didactic purposes rather than serious literary analysis.
These conclusions, however, are misleading when viewed from the perspective of those coming to grips with German religious life and theology in the shadow of Auschwitz and the deaths of millions of people at the front, at home, and in the death camps.
If one views Borchert as a spokesman for his generation only, one could easily conclude that his works are no longer relevant today. However, Borchert did not intend his writing to be simply documentary of his times. In his first manifesto, "Das ist unser Manifest," he indicates that he is addressing his own generation when he uses the first person plural throughout. However, in his last work, "Dann gibt es nur eins!" written about one month before his death, he exclusively uses the second person singular and plural, indicating that he has moved beyond matters concerning only himself and his own generation.
In addressing future generations, Borchert outlines the essence of the betrayal his generation suffered at hands of their forbearers. This becomes apparent in his third manifesto "Generation ohne Abschied":
Aber sie gaben uns keinen Gott mit, der unser Herz hatte halten konnen, wenn die Winde dieser Welt es umwirbelten. So sind wir die Generation ohne Gott, denn wir sind die Generation ohne Bindung, ohne Vergangenheit, ohne Anerkennung. (22) Borchert's analysis of the catastrophe of his times is unconventional. He almost entirely ignores...
To continue reading
Request your trialCOPYRIGHT GALE, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.
