Li BRAflY
Michigan State
L University

 

 

PLACE iN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record.
TO AVOID FINES return on or before due due.

DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE

     

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

cmma-M

 

SHATTERED IMAGES:
BREAKING THE TRADITION OF ENFORCED DQNESTICITY
IN THE LIFE AND WORKS 0F ELISE BURGER

BY

Jennifer Ann Petlick

A THESIS

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

MASTER OF ARTS
Department of Linguistics and Germanic,
Slavic, Asian and African Languages

1992

5'>’/"»a7n‘67§/

ABSTRACT
SHATTERED IMAGES:

BREAKING THE TRADITION OF ENFORCED DOMESTICITY
IN THE LIFE AND WORKS OF ELISE BURGER

BY
Jennifer Ann Petlick

The works of the eighteenth century author Elise Burger
(1769-1833) explored in this thesis reveal a feminist
perspective which shatters dominant prescriptive images for
women and offers revolutionary alternatives. By placing
strong and self-sufficient protagonists at the center of her
plays, she subverts the traditional images of women as
victims. The exploration of the areas of law, medicine, and
literary and cultural products sheds light on Bfirger's
situation and how it contributed to her resistance to the
conditions limiting women in general and writers in
particular. This study deconstructs the myths surrounding
Elise Burger created by her husband and adopted by literary

critics.

Copyright by
JENNIFER ANN PETLICK
1992

To my parents, Edward S. and Caroline T. Petlick

iv

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

It is with gratitude that I thank my advisory committee,
Professors Thomas A. Lovik, Patrick M. McConeghy, Patricia
R. Paulsell, and especially my committee chair, Karin A.
Wurst. Their advice, encouragement, and wisdom have been
invaluable. I would also like to thank Gregory J. Rumler,
who never gave up on me and would not let me give up on

myself.

INTRODUCTION

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SOCIO-HISTORICAL BACKGROUND .

LITERARY/THEORETICAL APPROACH
BIOGRAPHICAL BACKGROUND

ELISE BURGER'S WORKS

CONCLUSION

APPENDIX A - SYNOPSES OF ELISE BURGER'S

WORKS

APPENDIX B - OTHER WORKS BY ELISE BURGER .

APPENDIX C - DAS GEDICHT "AN DEN DICHTER BURGER"

BIBLIOGRAPHY

vi

21

28

48

77

85

115

117

121

INTRODUCTION

Elise Bfirger (1769-1833) was a woman whose life was far
from ordinary. As judged by her husband, literary
historians, and biographers in terms of adherence to the
domestic virtues expected of eighteenth century women as
housekeepers, wives and mothers, Bfirger came up lacking.

Her activities outside the home contradicted traditional
roles of womanhood in the eighteenth century. After her
divorce, she was active in declamation, acting, teaching,
and writing. Her first literary work was published in 1799,
seven years after her divorce from the author, Gottfried
August Bfirger (1747-1794). But the publicity from their
scandalous relationship set boundaries for her professional
life long after the divorce. Some theaters, such as the one
in Frankfurt am Main, refused to let her perform because she
had been declared the guilty party in the divorce trial.
Literary and biographical lexica assume her husband's
perspective when describing "Bfirger's Schwabenmadchen," as
she came to be known; more often than not, the focus in
these lexica is her relationship to him rather than the
merit of her literary works. Rarely do they mention that
she was a great success in many theaters. Rarely do they

mention that she was creative, generous, and industrious,

1

2
nor do they mention that she signed a statement, presumably

under duress, admitting adultery and thus relinquishing her
rights to her only son. She admitted her guilt in order to
escape the confining marriage to a man more than twice her
age who himself openly admitted to adultery and to having an
illegitimate child.

Central to the analysis at hand is how Elise Bflrger
shattered roles created for her on the micro level by her
husband, and roles created for all women on the macro level
by a male-dominated society. Before showing how Bflrger's
life and works were all but ordinary, it is necessary to
explore the bourgeois lifestyle and value system during the
eighteenth century. As methodological guidelines used to
interpret women's works, Jeannine Blackwell's suggestions
concerning biographical information and other social
constraints faced by eighteenth century women serve as a
basis for understanding Bflrger's choices on the one hand,
and the agenda of the literary critics entrenched in a male-
dominated tradition on the other. Finally, an analysis of
five of her plays illustrates how she proposes alternatives
for women and suggests equality for all people. Her works
are non—conformist if one examines them from the dominant
perspective, but they fit into a female dramatic tradition

as described by Dagmar von Hoff in Drameg ges ngblicheg;
De ts a at e ' nen 80 (1989) and Karin Wurst in

W (1991) - This

n;

3
study attempts to expand our knowledge about images of women

as they are conceived in women's literature.

SOCIO-HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

The eighteenth century brought about many changes for
an emerging bourgeoisie. This study focuses on changes in
literary expectations, divorce laws, and women in the
theater because these elements of the changing society were
tightly interwoven and had a dramatic effect on the
opportunities for women and especially for women authors.

During the course of the eighteenth century new moral
and social values were conceived within the arts and above
all, in literature. The visual arts, music, and literature
which had afforded prestige to the courts and had served as
a source of entertainment (Grimminger 199) became
increasingly accessible to the bourgeoisie. With the
emergence of a free market, writers, musicians, and other
artists entered a new realm in which they could - ideally -
provide for themselves financially. The development of city
and national theaters and the goals of the new literary and
cultural products was to ensure the dignity and moral
principles of the emerging bourgeois society. In addition,
Moral Weeklies, which had been flourishing since the
beginning of the century, primed the readership for

moralistic literature later in the century (Habermas 55-58).

5
These periodicals informed, instructed, advised, and

promoted social ideals.

Literature moved further and further away from the

nfltzlishkeitserinzie of the early Enlightenment. as
theorized by Gottsched in his Critischen Dightkunst (1730),

and focused on more intellectual, moral, and philosophical
ideals, including a redefined portrayal of ideal humanity.
It thus became more complex and the element of entertainment
became less prominent. The growing complexity of "high"
literature affected a split between "high" and "low"
literature. According to figures in Jochen Schulte-Sasse's
Dig firitik an der Trivialliteratur seig deg Aufklarung the
period between 1751 and 1760 yielded only 125 works
considered trivial, while the period between 1801 and 1810
yielded 1,029 works (Schulte-Sasse 46-47), although the
majority of works were still considered "high literature."
Similarly, the number of Schauspigle rose from 125 in
between 1751 and 1760 to 1135 between 1781 and 1790
(Schulte-Sasse 46). The number of authors, including women
authors, also increased from about two or three thousand in
1766 to over ten thousand in 1800 (Beutin & Ehlert 127).
Schulte-Sasse characterizes the decade between 1770 and 1780
as the period in which "die Deutschen ihr

Empfindsamkeitsfieber verschleppten" (Schulte-Sasse 46-47).

This split within the literary production into "high"

and "low" had important consequences for the participation

6
of women authors. Since women were excluded from formal

education, they were unable to participate in writing "high"
or g;h§ng_§1§era§g; (Grimminger 166-67). Within sggégg
Literatu; bourgeois value systems, especially those
regarding gender-specific socialization, are found.
Canonical authors such as Lessing, Schiller, and Goethe
incorporated these systems into their works, either
portraying women as virtuous, devoted, dependent, and
emotional or as evil, vindictive, and jealous. Female
characters replicated valorized roles of housekeeper, wife,
daughter, and mother, and their depictions often relied on
the fantasy of the author rather than on reality. Johann
Wolfgang von Goethe, for example, confessed that he drew his
male characters from real life while his female characters
came from his fantasy - and - that the imagined female
characters were better than the real women he knew:

Die Frauen sind silberne Schalen, in die wir

goldene Apfel legen. Heine Idee von den

Frauen ist nicht von den Erscheinungen der

Wirklichkeit abstrahiert, sondern sie ist mir

angeboren, oder in mir entstanden Gott weifi

wie. Heine dargestellten Frauencharactere

sind daher auch alle gut weggekommen, sie

sind alle besser, als sie in der Wirklichkeit

anzutreffen sind . . . (Eckermann 30).

The female character was a representation of all that

eInbodied virtue. The female became a place for the struggle

7
between two value systems those of the nobility and those of

the bourgeoisie, apparent in both Emilia_§alggti and gig
Sara_§ampsgn. This clash between the value systems
functioned as a criticism of political systems and it
provided the dramatic conflict within the plays (Grimminger
456-473).

The aforementioned authors were also respected critics
and theorists and thus they set literary standards. The
literary attempts by those who did not conform to prescribed
aesthetic standards were excluded from "high art"; women
often were among those in this category. Their works
sometimes dealt with different topics and they took on a
form usually different from the "bflrgerliches Trauerspiel,"
as defined by Lessing.

As women made their way into the literary scene, their
endeavors were considered threatening to the female role
within the home and family. Men worked outside the home to
support their families, while their wives were expected to
remain at home, tend to the household budget, clean, cook,
mend, sew, watch over the servants, tend to the children,
and be at the disposal of their husbands, who were the
absolute rulers of the home (Frevert 43). For women,
writing was thought to take away from their primary
responsibilities and to threaten the stability of the
family. The literary critic Carl Wilhelm Otto August von
Schindel describes this phenomenon in the foreword to his

work D' e ts en rif stel eri nen des eu ze nten

8
Qahrnunggrtg (1823) entitled ”Ueber die Schriftstellerei der

Frauen und ihren Beruf dazu”:
Einige tadeln fast jede Schriftstellerei der
Frauen, als ihrem eigenthumlichen Berufe fremd,
und sprechen ihr alles Verdienst ab, da sie nur,
von Eitelkeit geleitet, glanzen wollen, und
darfiber die Pflichten der Haushaltung und
Kinderzucht vernachlassigen und unglfickliche Ehen
befbrdern . . . (Schindel VI).

This prescriptive essay necessarily relegates women's works

into the realm of Trivialliteratur.

Literary critics found the sale of Trivialliteratgz,
which was often written by women, and the public's interest
in these works disgraceful. With the increase in literary
production came a split into Trivialliteratu; and none
Literatuz. Some critics suggest that the two types of
literary production were read by distinctly different
readers, the uneducated masses on the one hand, and the
educated, reading circle on the other (Schulte-Sasse 48).
It follows then that authors of "high literature" served as
a mouthpiece mirroring the values and morals of their

audience.

9
[Die Dichter] akzeptierten und bestatigten die

geltenden Moralprinzipien und Geschmacksregeln,
sie erfanden sie nicht und veranderten sie nicht.
Sie schrieben ihre Werke ffir ein festumrissenes
und streng begrenztes Publikum und waren
keineswegs bestrebt, neue Interessenten zu
gewinnen, neue Leser zu akquirieren (Hauser 242).
Criticism of Iriyiallitgrgtg; came about because it was
thought to lower standards. In educated circles, aesthetic
qualities of literature were often based on the premise that
the author and his public create a single, spiritual,
intellectual community (Schulte-Sasse 52). This premise was
based on two main theorems:
Alle Menschen reagieren, wenn ihr
Empfindungsverm6gen natflrlich ist, in der Aufnahme
kflnstlerischer Werke gleich, d.h. natflrlich und
richtig, weil die Seelenvermogen aller Menschen
gleich organisiert sind; daraus folgt, daB der
Dichter, der sich ja nach der "Natur" richten
soll, die Autoritat und den Geschmack des
Publikums fur sein Schaffen als richtungsweisend
anerkennen muB . . . (Schulte-Sasse 52).
Generalizations about a reader's reaction was part of
the prescriptive mindset of the critics. Some felt that
aesthetic enjoyment must lead the soul to efficiency and
activity, since a person's true nature cannot be measured by

passiveness and quiet enjoyment. Other critics warned

aga

wei
um:
cri
art
sir.
med
qre
pri
(Sc
the
Put
(Sc

laz

Fun

Coht

1031

10
against the over-use of sentimentality, a main element in

Iriyiallitgzatgr, because it " . . . sehr schadlich sei,
weil er [der Mensch] alsdenn weichlich, schwach und
unmannlich wird . . . " (Schulte-Sasse 54). Another
criticism of Iriyiallitgrgtu; deemed it an anti-system to
art, because lower literature was thought to lead one to
sin. Yet another view was that in order to overcome
mediocrity and become a great author, one had to possess a
great spirit, as no mediocre or ill-spirited creature was
privileged to experience " . . . die hbchste Poesie . . . "
(Schulte-Sasse 59). These criticisms were not only against
the literature as a whole but also " . . . gegen das
Publikum, das nach dieser Literatur verlangt . . . "
(Schulte-Sasse 59). Iriyialliteratu; was thought to lead to
laziness and passiveness:

Der Leser der Trivialliteratur flieht alle

Anstrengungen der Krafte, alle Thatigkeit

wird abgestrumpft, weil sie keine Nahrung

findet, sie sinken in eine Lethargie des

Korpers und des Geistes, werden unbrauchbar

fur den Staat, fur ihre Freunde und fur alles

wozu eine gewisse Starke des Korpers und

GrbBe des Geistes erfordert wird . . . (Hoche

74).
Furthermore, it was thought to lead to the inability to
contemplate and solve problems; one would only want to play,

losing the ability to reason and overcome difficulties.

11
According to critics, the goal of Trivialliteratur was

to elicit either emotions or personal enjoyment. The reader
would only react to those details within the work s/he found
emotionally stirring instead of reacting to the work as a
unified whole (Schulte-Sasse 62). For example, women's
works were often published in weekly and monthly magazines,
and their story lines had many emotional, sentimental high
points, presumably to entice the audience to read the
following issue. Thus, the serialization of the works did
not lend itself to prescriptive elements of h9hg_Li§g;a§gr
since the reader could not enjoy the beauty of the whole,
dooming the serialized works automatically to be
characterized as "low."

Friedrich Schiller, who referred to the authors of
Iriyiallitgzatu; as "Schundskribenten," attacks this body of
works, some of them written by women, thus:

Die schmelzenden Affekte, die bloB zartlichen
Rflhrungen, gehoren zum Gebiet des Angenehmen,
mit dem die schone Kunst nichts zu thun hat.
Sie ergétzen bloB den Sinn durch Auflosung
oder Erschlaffung, und beziehen sich blofi auf
den auBern, nicht auf den innern Zustand des
Menschen. Viele unsrer Romane und
Trauerspiele, besonders der sogenannten
Dramen (Mitteldinge zwischen Lustspiel und
Trauerspiel) und der beliebten

Familiengemahlde gehoren in diese Klasse.

ger

cle

ac<

"H:
ha}
91:
Spe
Sh:
Sm.

int

12
Sie bewirken blofl Ausleerungen des

Thranensacks und eine wollfistige
Erleichterung der GefaBe; aber der Geist geht
leer aus, und die edlere Kraft im Menschen
wird ganz und gar nicht dadurch gestarkt

. . . (Schiller 199).

Schiller's statement is accurate in one respect. The
genre of choice by women authors typically was not tragedy
(or comedy) because, according to critics, one would need a
classical education replete with Latin and Greek to write
according to the dictates of this genre. Instead, they
wrote dramas such as the genre criticized by Schiller,
"Mitteldinge zwischen Lustspiel und Trauerspiel," in which
happy endings, sentimentality, and excitement were prominent
elements. Prescriptive essays, such as Schindel's foreword,
specifically outline appropriate types of works that women
should write, none of which includes the drama, as he
suggests a gender-based poetics based on physical and
intellectual destinies:

Nun wird allerdings jede vernfinftige und nicht
verbildete Frau den schbnen und groBen
eigenthfimlichen Beruf ihres Geschlechts, Gattin,
Hausfrau und Mutter zu sein, nicht verkennen.
Alles in der Organisation dieses Geschlechts, in
den physichen und geistigen, so eng mit einander
verbundenen und durch jene bestimmten Anlagen, in

den Erscheinungen der frfihesten Kindheit mit ihren

13
Spielen und Neigungen, - von denen des mannlichen

Geschlechts so sehr verschieden (ist) (Schindel
VIII-IX).

He states that if women must write they should write
religious poetry, novels and stories that relate to the home
because of their expertise in that sphere; travel
descriptions on account of their ”superior" ability to
observe; accounts of their domestic experiences because they
are the experts as housewives, mothers, and educators; or
they should write letters and essays (Schindel XX-XXV). Any
deviation from Schindel's guidelines would generate
criticism. Unfortunately, the criticism was based on biased
criteria, as women were not afforded equal intellectual
nourishment:

Die Frau, die sich fiber die Grenzen der
traditionell weiblichen Bildung
(Grundkenntnisse im Schreiben, Lesen, Rechnen
etwas Weltgeschichte, Mythologie, Zeichnen,
Tanzen, Briefschreiben, Musik und
Handarbeiten, Franzbsisch) hinaus bilden
will, wird durch zahlreiche Diskurse
entmutigt. Ihr werden in Zeitschriften und
in der Belletristik negativ gezeichnete
Bilder der gelehrten Frau in Form des

Blaustrumpfs vorgefuhrt . . . (wurst 35).

Eli
den

of

ver
mai
soc
dif
div
Her
in

SQ‘J
fol

la).

rea
ful
how
inc
Ch}
810

tha

Fir

dis€

hUsk

14
Elise Bflrger's choice of the drama as her primary genre

demonstrates her disregard for the educational prerequisites
of a prescriptive, confining, gender-based poetics.

But literary standards and educational opportunities
were only a small part of the social mechanisms for
maintaining control over women's behavior. Another form of
social control existed within the laws, as men and women had
different legal rights. In Elise Bfirger's situation,
divorce laws played a large role in determining her destiny.
Her husband was able to manipulate events to his advantage
in order to rid himself of his allegedly adulterous and
squanderous wife in order to maintain his own dignity. The
following outline of the development of pertinent divorce
laws will make this point clearer.

Around the turn of the seventeenth century only three
reasons for divorce were acceptable: adultery, refusal to
fulfill conjugal duty, and impotence. A century later,
however, grounds for divorce in the German principalities
included incompatibility of temper, contagious disease,
cruel treatment, and irreconcilable animosity, as divorce
slowly became an institution governed by the state rather
than by the church (Woolsey 140).

By the mid—1700's, a divorce could be obtained if both
parties agreed to it after a year's separation of bed and
board. Other grounds consisted of battery, infamous
disease, a plot against the life of a spouse, cruelty of the

husband or extravagance or drunkenness of the wife (Woolsey

141
ter
fre
div
Nix
mut
yea
Pn
ad

59)

thi
we:
ex-
De
th
pu.
th

310:

i‘ii

Dre

15
141-142). When Friedrich II made a journey through his

territories in 1782 and observed an abnormally high
frequency of divorces, he issued an edict eliminating
divorces based on trivial complaints (Erler & Kaufman 827).
Nine years later, the code of 1791 accepted divorce by
mutual consent if the couple had been childless for four
years or if deadly hatred existed between them. The code of
Prussian Langzggnt, for instance, allowed divorce if
adultery, malicious desertion, which included refusal of the
sex act or mental or physical "accidental visitation of
providence," which included mental insanity and impotence.

According to Prussian Law, the.consequences as well as
the grounds for divorce were regulated. A divorced person
was allowed to remarry the person of his or her choice,
except if s/he had been found guilty of adultery with this
person. Divorced people were also obliged to show proof of
the dissolution of their marriage to the clergyman who
published and solemnized their re-marriage nuptials. Under
these laws no time restrictions were imposed on men but
women were forced to "wait according to circumstances" for
three to nine months before they were allowed to re-marry
(Erler & Kaufmann 827).

At the time of Elise Bfirger's divorce in 1792, the
options available to Gottfried August Bfirger in his attempt
to divorce his wife were limited. He complained that his
wife would not have intercourse with him during her

pregnancy because, according to her, it was painful; this,

16
however, would have been considered malicious desertion. He

complained that she was an unfit mother and thus had her
sickly son taken from her and sent to her mother in
Stuttgart. The child's illness was blamed on her because
she could not produce enough breast milk, thereby
necessitating the hiring of a wet nurse. This was
considered wasteful, as a wife's duty was to keep household
spending to a minimum. Furthermore, breast-feeding had
become part of the propaganda directed at women as a means
of maintaining a good reputation (Frevert 47). Her
inability to breast-feed was considered another failure in
her womanly duties. Finally, Bfirger alleged that he had
come to blows with his wife when he found her with another
man. Such charges of battery would have led to a speedy
divorce.

Before Friedrich II's edict, G. A. Bfirger would have
been able to obtain a divorce on the grounds of
extravagance, as his wife was not only spending money on a
wet-nurse, she was not supervising the servants to his
satisfaction. Ute Frevert states in ngen in German History
that a wife's job was to organize the work, which included
shopping and managing the production and processing of the
food, since few finished items could be purchased (Frevert
41). Wives were also in charge of the linen cupboards and
pantries, and if she delegated these duties to a servant, it
was considered wasteful and disorganized. In 1791, thirteen

months after their marriage, Bfirger criticized his wife's

17
sloppy household management because the "government of the

house" was run not by her, but by ”slovenly maids" who had
free access to all the resources, while the woman of the
house was rarely seen in the kitchen or pantry (Frevert 41-
42).

But since Friedrich II had outlawed trivial complaints,
the only proof Bfirger was able to present in his grievance
against his wife was that of adultery, after allegedly
witnessing her in the sex act with a male visitor. He also
had access to a letter to his wife in which the sender
addressed her with the informal g3, "proving” her
infidelity. It was this letter that was used during the
divorce trial, the only evidence he was able to use legally.
Only ten years earlier, however, any of his smaller
complaints against her would have warranted a divorce, and
he freely told his friends and family of his dissatisfaction
with his wife as a means of preserving his good name.

Although the divorce laws were written to protect all
citizens, male and female alike, the fact that only men were
allowed to communicate their grievances in the public
sphere, suggests that a great inequality existed, making
Elise BUrger unable to defend herself with the same
confidence as her husband. The treatment she was forced to
endure, however, seems to be counterscted in her plays
through independent, clever protagonists, who do not fall

victim to domineering husbands and suitors.

18
Another prominent social change during the eighteenth

century took place within the German theater. The home life
and social restrictions for women were confining and many
women chose careers in the theater, enabling themselves to
attain a level of independence comparable to men's. The
changes in the German theater during the first part of the
eighteenth century, provided new opportunities for women
(Becker-Cantarino 313; Grimminger 190). After experiencing
financial uncertainty in the first part of the century,
wandering theater troupes enjoyed greater social acceptance
and financial stability during the second half of the
century, as city populations grew and the interests of the
bourgeoisie turned to moral values and education. The
growing interest in the bourgeois theater enabled cities to
engage troupes for longer periods of time, which in turn
helped increase their repertoire, equipment, and costumes.
No longer were the players considered vagabonds threatening
to introduce Satan to their audiences (Becker-Cantarino
317).

Women's roles in the theater, however, were still few,
especially in the courtly theater. As a result, actresses
were typecast according to the roles they played best
(Becker-Cantarino 330). For this reason, Elise Bfirger
characterizes herself in her work fiber meinen Aufentnglt in
flagnggyg; as best being suited for roles as "Heldinnen und
Liebhaberinnen im Trauerspiel (und) junge Weiber im Schau=

und Lustspiel" (Bflrger 13).

busin
and v.
For t

perso:

Reinh

19
During the second half of the eighteenth century, the

business of the theater became more lucrative and accepted,
and women became members of national and courtly theaters.
For the first time, it was possible for women to attain
personal and financial independence apart from the home:
Sie k6nnten Geld verdienen - in vielen Fallen
genau so viel wie der Mann, der neben ihnen
auf der Bflhne stand - , reisen, schwierigen
Eltern oder unerwfinschten Heirat ausweichen.
Und sie kbnnten 6ffentliche Anerkennung
finden, die Frauen sonst nicht erhielten
. . . (Brinker-Gabler 421).
Reinhart Meyer supports this as well:
Die Faszination liegt vor allem im
Widerspruch zur bfirgerlichen Existenz; die
drflckende Enge treibt die Jugendlichen zu den
Truppen. . . (Grimminger 193).

Although women seemed to view the theater lifestyle as
an escape, the parts they played, however, were typically
regulated by male directors (Becker-Cantarino 340). When
faced with criticism of their performances, women often felt
the need to publicly defend themselves, either in writing or
on the stage itself (Brinker-Gabler 423). Bfirger's work
fiber meineg Augenthalt in fiannover gegen den uggegnanten

.s e_ 1- _ hfc.s-le e51e_ ea _alTsc_-1 zyen 1e re- 1
(1801) is a prime example. Other actresses defended

themselves through the distribution of leaflets or through

prologs
lifesty
manner:
isolier
offener
Leben [
Al
Eightee
overcon
Dawson
Some )4:
Situatj

wrote I

20
prologs on the stage. Ruth Dawson characterizes the

lifestyle of the professional actress in the following
manner: sie ffihrte "ein viel ungesichertes, sozial
isoliertes, allerdings auch viel selbststandigeres,
offeneres und an persbnlichen Herausforderungen reicheres
Leben [. . .] als die Bfirgerin” (Brinker-Gabler 423).
Although women's roles were highly regulated in the
eighteenth century, they did, however, make an attempt to
overcome these regulations. Performing on the stage, as
Dawson points out, was one way to challenge the status quo.
Some women removed themselves from confining domestic
situations by turning to the theater, while others merely

wrote plays and dreamed of independence.

LITERARY/THEORETICAL APPROACH

The examination of women's literary works from a
feminist perspective is central to evaluating themes in
Elise Bfirger's works. Male and female experiences in the
18th and 19th centuries, in this case, are different, and
male authors' descriptions of women's experiences do not
have the authority of experience of their female
counterparts. Nina Baym is quoted in Making a Difference:
W as saying:
[there has been] a bias in favor of things male -
in favor, - say, of whaling ships rather than the
sewing circle as a symbol of the human community;
in favor of satires on domineering mothers,
shrewish wives, or betraying mistresses rather
than tyrannical fathers, abusive husbands, or
philandering suitors; displaying an exquisite
compassion for the crises of the adolescent male,
but altogether impatient with the parallel crisis
of the female (Kaplan 47).

But by favoring male experiences and representing female

experiences through a male perspective, the authenticity or

authority of the female perspective is weakened, if not

ignored. Dominant perspectives or social norms should be

21

22
questioned precisely because they are not all-encompassing;

they are unrealistic and limiting. Men's depictions of
women seldom show women in relationships with other women
other than jealouysly fighting over a man, presumably
because male authors do not understand or recognize how
women interact with one another. But by accepting women's
authority in women's literary works, the dynamics of female
experiences and relationships can be recognized for their
authenticity.

Elise Bfirger's works have no domineering mothers, only
loving matriarchs; there are no shrewish wives, only those
who seek to preserve their relationships; there are no
betraying mistresses, only women who fight to defend their
autonomy, their suitors, and their children. Tyrannical
fathers, abusive husbands, and deceitful suitors, on the
other hand, do grace the pages of Bfirger's works, perhaps
making them potentially threatening to a male-dominant
society by putting ideas into the heads of a female
readership or audience.

The issue of female credibility and authority as female
authors forms Jeannine Blackwell's article "Anonym,
verschollen, trivial: Methodological Hindrances in
Researching German Women's Literature." The
methodological tools described in Blackwell's artice have
been used while researching Elise Bfirger's life and works
because they advocate female credibility and authority. She

points out that works written by women are "often a

23
literature of the 'other Germany' - - critical, republican,

socialist, utopian, or feminist - - it is not harmless,
impotent droolings" (Blackwell 39).

In describing her method of studying women's works,
Blackwell provides the feminist scholar with five critical
categories which can be used to deconstruct myths created
about women authors entrenched in a male-dominant society:
1) authority and authenticity, 2) periodization, 3) the
"great artist," 4) gender and genre, and 5) reading
backwards in the mirror of literary history. First, she
suggests that the feminist scholar should question the
authority and authenticity of the male-dominant tradition of
literary history and criticism. That is, by revering
authors such as Goethe whose "genius . . . is the paradigm
and measure" (Blackwell 45), one denies the recognition of
other types and forms of literature. Similarly, Elaine
Louise Bernikow states:

What is commonly called literary history is
actually a record of choices. Which writers have
survived their time and which have not depends
upon who noticed them and chose to record the
notice (Showalter A_Lirgrgrurg_gf_1hgir_gyn 36).
Blackwell continues by stating that scholars must be
cautious not to accept a critic's opinion as the undeniable
truth. Instead, feminist critics should re-examine the
authenticity of evaluating women's writings based on a male-

dominant ”spiritual, intellectual, or aesthetic hierarchy"

24
(Blackwell 45). This can be done by examining women's

authority over their subject matter, not by pushing their
writings "into the framework of almost exclusively male
movements which happen to be simultaneous (Enlightenment,
Storm and Stress, Romanticism, Expressionism) and then find
them wanting" (Blackwell 46).

Second, Blackwell suggests that scholars recognize the
fact that literary categories and movements of the German
canon are "directly proportional to the elite humanistic
university education and the class standing of their
authors” (Blackwell 46). An example of bias from a male-
specific body of works cannot and should not be imposed on a
female-specific body of works, since the categories often
used in their evaluation, education and class background,
are far from identical. Blackwell further points out that a
critical period of high female literary production, 1790 to
1830, is typically categorized as Classicism and
Romanticism, but female literary endeavors seldom fit either
category. Instead, she calls female writings "Salonism - -
the mediation of literature and social exchange by women
between domestic and public life" (Blackwell 46-47). She
states that women often imitated masculine literary
traditions, but she contends that they also combined them
with their own creativity, and the synthesis of the two
should "not be to the detriment of unrecognized literary

trends" (Blackwell 47).

25
Third, Blackwell denounces the notion of "The Great

Artist", the male author whose genius earns him eternal
reverence but earns the literary wife, sister, lover, or
mother little more than a mention in a literary history or
biographical lexicon listed under his name. Oftentimes
female literary works are masked behind the name of a
husband or brother, or they are kept anonymous in order to
be published. This stems from the Prussian Civil Code which
made it clear that the man was the head of the household and
any attempts of a woman to pursue a career had to be
approved first by her husband (Frevert 43). Instead of
being evaluated on her writings, the female author was
evaluated according to her role in the "Great Artist's"
life, usually as mother, wife, or lover. The creation of a
female body of literary works, therefore, must break this
tradition in order to dispel myths and to present a more
representative version of the truth.

Fourth, Blackwell writes, "a firm refusal of the
hierarchy of genre is a basic premise for feminist
scholarship” (Blackwell 50). Rather than relying on male
literary critics' method of evaluating literature, which
usually holds works up in comparison to the classics,
Blackwell argues that the feminist critic should evaluate
women's literature according to a female tradition
indepencdent of classical models, since women often worked
from no specific tradition. If a woman ventured into a

genre typically employed by male authors, she was usually

26
criticized because her education in French and Italian art,

complex meter, drama, poetry, and aesthetics was non-
existent or second hand, and therefore their education
should not be evaluated by the same standards.

Finally, Blackwell suggests that the feminist critic
should read backwards to find the gaps in the literary
histories, which includes seeking buried information,
distrusting negative reviews, rejecting inaccurate plot
summaries, and reading and re-reading works. Also important
is recognizing and questioning blatant errors and
repetitions in scholarship, particularly biographical and
bibliographical reference works. An example can be found in

Ludwig Eisenberg's (1903) account of Bfirger's works, as it

lists We as 9.12M
g§§_gg1rlign§n_ggrzgn§ (Eisenberg 138). Another example can

be seen in Hermann Krfiger's account of her life completed in
1914, where he states that her final place of residence was
Cassel, instead of Frankfurt am Main (Krfiger 86), which is
the exact same information provided by Friedrich Rassmann in
1823, ten years before her death; Krfiger seems to have taken
his information from Rassmann, not bothering to update his
information on Elise Bfirger. Yet another biographer, C.
Gerhard, lists her death date simply as "Herbst 1832,"
whereas most every other source lists it as November 24,
1833.

According to Blackwell, a typical entry for a female

author in a biographical lexicon begins with her

27
relationship to her husband, brother, father, or lover,

describing her role in his life, with perhaps a brief
mention of her literary works, either with or without
critical commentary. In the case of Elise Bfirger, a more
representative list of her works is only mentioned in one
source, published in 1929 by a sympathetic biographer,
Arthur Richel (see Appendix B). Blackwell's technique of
reading backwards includes finding and reading all editions
of a particular work to form an independent opinion from
that of other critics in order to identify gaps and
contradictions. She suggests searching for additional
information in title pages, prefaces, pictures, and hidden
plots to help reconstruct the works and lives of female
authors and the deconstruction of the myths about these
women created by a male-dominant tradition. Blackwell's
five guidelines have been used to interpret and research

Elise Bflrger's works.

BIOGRAPHICAL BACKGROUND

Marie Christiane Elisabeth Hahn Bfirger was born in
Stuttgart in 1769. Her father was an E ed't'onsrat,
Wm. WM. and Lanter-
After his death when she was twelve, Hahn's mother raised
her alone, since her only sibling, a brother, was an officer
in Wflrttemberg. Elise Hahn always had an interest in the
theater and according to one of her biographers, Hermann
Kinder, she dreamed of a Bohemian lifestyle (158). But, she
was not a member of the aristocracy or the nobility, she was
not a professor's daughter, and she did not have the benefit
of entry into the salon society as the result of her
descent. Kinder further states that because of the pietism
and narrow-mindedness in the Swabian society, Hahn felt
confined. Kinder also describes her marriage to the
Professor and author Gottfried August Bfirger as an
opportunity to satisfy her curiosity about culture and
society in larger circles. Kinder states that she was often
described as fresh, outspoken, flirtatious, difficult to
keep entertained, sentimental, and educated, although he
does not reveal, nor do any other accounts of her life,
exactly how she was educated. He further writes that she

belonged to an avant garde, bourgeois subculture often

28

29
common among those with a literary, philosophical education.

Elise Bfirger's marriage to Gottfried August Bfirger has
been the topic in most every literary history and
biographical entry concerning either of them. According to
Ernst Consentius, the young Elise Hahn fell in love with
Bflrger's poem "Die Nachtfeier der Venus" (Consentius CI)
after borrowing a poetry book from a friend of her mother,
the Philosophiae Studiosus Herr M. Nast (Ehrmann 10). Nast
found a copy of Elise Hahn's poem "An den Dichter Bfirger"
(see Appendix C) and sent it to Theophil Ehrmann on
September 8, 1789 to be published in his political, moral,
and satirical weekly newspaper Qer Beobaghter. Ehrmann
states in the foreword to the published letters between his
wife, Marianne Ehrmann, and Bfirger, that he suggested she
inform Bfirger about the poem:

Ey, Weibchen schlieB doch dem lieben Mann auch ein
Blatt von dem Beobachter bey, worin das an ihm
gerichtete Gedicht stehet; es muB ihn doch freuen,
wenn er sieht, wie sehr er auch in Schwaben
geschatzt wird, und dann tragt es auch zu weiterer
Bekanntmachung meines Blattes bey! (Ehrmann 15)

After the poem "An den Dichter Bfirger" was published,
Bflrger was the object of much attention and he contemplated
finding his admirer - the "Schwabenmadchen." Ehrmann writes
that he did not think it wise to reveal the identity of the
woman and therefore kept it a secret. But Bflrger was

relentless in his attempts to find the identity of the

30
"Schwabenmadchen" and Ehrmann advised his wife to go to

Elise Hahn in the presence of her mother to determine if
she, in fact, was the "Schwabenmfidchen." After it was
discovered that she had written the poem, Bfirger sent a
poetic reply through the Ehrmanns, which Hahn answered
anonymously but with her mother's knowledge. While Hahn
pleaded with the Ehrmanns to keep her identity secret, they
found the situation amusing, until they realized that Bfirger
was serious in his intentions.
In the meantime, Theophil Ehrmann became acquainted

with Hahn, whom he describes as:

ein sch6nes, aber sehr rasches, feuriges

Madchen von zwanzig Jahren . . . (ich)

lernte sie von einer Seite kennen, die sie im

geffilligsten Lichte, als ein feinffihlendes,

lebhaftes, geistreiches, liebenswfirdiges

Frauenzimmer darstellte . . . (Ehrmann 18).
After Bfirger made his marriage intentions known, the
Ehrmanns could not keep the secret any longer and revealed
her identity, but not until Burger inquired about Elise
Hahn's financial situation:

Sagen Sie mir, Freundin, hat das Madchen

einiges Vermbgen? Und wie viel wohl? -

Freylich eine elende Frage, die ich selbst

mit Ekel und Unwillen thue! Aber warum hat

die Erzmetze Fortuna mich dazu verdammt, dafi

ich sie thun muB? (Kinder 25).

31
lie also received a portrait of her, but he was somewhat

(disappointed by it, as he expresses to Marianne Ehrmann on
February 11, 1790:
Was ich sonst geliebt habe, war blond, daher
phantasierte ich mir auch immer mein
Schwabenmfidchen blond . . . die Locken, wenn
sie wirklich so schwarz sind, als das Bild
vermuthen 155e, mfiBten indessen doch ein
wenig gepudert werden . . . (Kinder 24-25).
The following excerpt to Bfirger's brother-in-law, the
brother of his two previous wives, indicates that not only
was Elise Hahn's portrait important to Bfirger, so too was a
statement of her wealth and virtue.
Ich werde mir wohl 1. ihr Portrait, 2. einen
bescheinigten Statum ihres Vermégens und 3.
glaubhafte Dokumente ihrer ehrbaren
jungfraulichen Auffflhrung erbitten mfissen.
So was ist doch in Praxi noch nicht
vorgekommen . . . (Pfister 233).
Bfirger did in fact receive the portrait, and Elise Hahn did
bring 1,000 taler to the marriage, but whether he received
the other information is unknown.

Following a brief correspondence, Bfirger wrote a
"confession" letter to Hahn in order to paint for her an
accurate picture of himself. In the letter he informs her
of his previous two marriages, to two sisters. Bfirger

married Dorette Leonhart in 1774 but had an illicit affair

32
with her younger sister Molly, which produced an

illegitimate son, Emil, who was forced to stay with
relatives in order for Bfirger to avoid shame and scandal.
Dorette died in 1784 enabling Bfirger to marry Molly in 1785,
but their marriage only lasted a year, since Molly died in
1786. Given Bfirger's three children and no woman in the
house, Bfirger sent his two daughters, one by Dorette and the
other by Molly, to stay with relatives.

With Bfirger's past out in the open, Elise Hahn
discussed the prospect of marriage with her mother, who
advised her to decline. With three children, the oldest
being twelve, Hahn's mother thought that the undertaking
would be too great for a girl of twenty. Hahn declined
Bfirger's proposal of marriage in a letter, but he was so
certain that she would accept that he had already departed
for Stuttgart to meet her when the letter arrived in
Gattingen.

After Bfirger's arrival, the two got to know each other,
even though Elise admits that upon seeing him for the first
time, she went ice cold (Laddey 127-128):

Als ich ihn sah, seine kleine, hagere
Gestalt, sein so wenig dazu passendes groBes
Gesicht, welches so gar nicht dem Bilde
entsprach, das ihre allzu geschaftigte
Phantasie sich von ihm gemalt, als er

abgemessen, nicht in feurigen Worten, wie sie

33
erwartete, zu ihr sprach, Uberlief es sie

eiskalt . . . (Gerhard 1223).
Since there is a gap in the letters, it is not possible to
determine what exactly transpired between the couple, but
they were apparently satisfied enough with each other to go
through with the marriage in October of 1790 (Krfiger 85-86).
But the romantic situation Ehrmann and Consentius describe,
of Elise Burger being so moved by the great author's poetry
that she was inspired to propose marriage, is contradicted
in the 1872 Qartenlaube article ”Aus den letzten Tagen einer
Vielgennante, Elise Bfirger." The article describes her
home, financial situation, and her mental state during the
last days of her life as told to E. Laddey by Bfirger's
student Hermann Hendrichs. When asked how her relationship
with Barger began, she replies:

Die Welt lfigt, es ist nicht wahr, ich habe

mich ihm nicht zur Ehe angetragen! Das

Gedicht war der Ausflufi einer tollen Laune,

nichts weiter. Wir saBen froh beianander

[sic], junge Madchen und Manner, in Stuttgart

war's, wir spielten Pffinderspiele; da gab man

mir die Aufgabe, mein Pfand mit einer Antwort

an Bflrger, der gerade durch einen

scherzhaften Aufruf die Madchen gebeten

hatte, sich seiner Wittwerschaft zu erbarmen,

auszulfisen. Man kannte meine Schwfirmerei far

den Dichter und sein tragisches Geschick.

34
Ich war ein fiberspanntes Ding, auBerdem

fibermfltig fiber die MaBen. Durch jene Zeilen
stachelte ich zugleich die Eifersucht meiner
jungen Vereherer an; stolz gab ich ihnen
das schnell entstandene Gedicht, lachend
mein Pfand zurflcknehmend . . . (Laddey 127-
128).
She continues to say that the poem was published without her
knowledge.

Other biographers, such as Ludwig Geiger, also support
Elise Bfirger's version of the story. Geiger was a
biographer of Therese Huber and his 1902 Inge; article
entitled, "Eine AusgestoBene, Elise Bfirger" includes a
letter from Huber to her daughter Therese Forster
corroborating Bflrger's story. It describes how Huber and
Elise Bfirger became acquainted in thtingen after Bfirger
moved there with her husband. Kinder includes Geiger's
article in his bibliography but he regards Huber's
conversation with Burger as nothing more than
unsubstantiated gossip among two divorced women. Kinder's
biography and commentary to Bfirger's Ehestaegsgeschiehre,
republished in 1981, does not, however, include other
articles, such as Laddey's, which gives an account of the
marriage in favor of Elise Bfirger's viewpoint, which

indicates Kinder's ignorance of an important source.

35
Although Kinder seems negligent in portraying the whole

story, his description of Bfirger's expectations for his
prospective wife seems to be accurate:
G. A. Bfirger wollte eine junge sinnliche Frau,
geschaffen zur Wollust und mit einem vollen, schbn
gewblbten Busen, dazu eine schbne Seele, die an
seinen Interessen den lebhaftesten Anteil nahm und
Klavier spielte sowie ein artiges
Gesellschaftsleben regierte, dazu eine Mutter zur
Versorgung der Kinder, dazu eine tfichtige
Hausfrau, die nicht nur Vermbgen einbrachte,
sondern auch den Haushalt so in SchuB hielt, daB
die Schulden vermindert werden konnte - die
Geliebte-Prokuristin-Kindergartnerin-Putzfrau, die
Hure-Mutter-Haushfilterin . . . (Kinder 156).
Bfirger himself defines a good marriage as having a wife with
the following traits: "Geist, Herz, Character, und
Lebensart, Sitten, Stand, Ehre, Vermbgen sind zwar wichtige
Ingredienzen zu einer glficklichen Ehe . . ." (Kinder 41).
Bflrger's "Schwabenmadchen" was a sensation in
Gfittingen, and the people of the town speculated as to how
the marriage would fare considering Bfirger's affairs between
the death of Molly and his marriage to Elise. BUrger
himself writes in the confession letter entitled "Beichte
eines Mannes, der ein edles Madchen nicht hintergehen will:"
(February 1790) "Ubrigens kann ich nicht bergen, daB man

mich fflr einen ziemlichen Libertin halt, und leideri nicht

36
ganz Unrecht hat . . ." (Kinder 33). Not only did Elise

Bfirger enter into a marriage with a self-proclaimed
libertine, she was forced to be mother to his children whom
the couple picked up on their way back to Gattingen after
the marriage in Stuttgart. G. A. Bfirger states: "Ich wfirde
sie dann wieder um mich versammelt wissen wollen, theils um
Kosten zu ersparen, theils um ihre Erziehung unter meinen
Augen zu besorgen . . .” (Kinder 37).

Nevertheless, Elise Bfirger made herself quite visible
in his life by plunging into the spiritual, cultural, and
artistic aspects of Bfirger's social circle. She arranged
theater tours and several other activities, and she was also
careful not to be overlooked or mistreated. Her dual role
of keeping social obligations and integrating herself into
salons life, as well as her role as wife, mother, and
housekeeper in a small town led to complications. Jealousy
and envy on account of her beauty and talent caused many of
the women in the town to resent her, while their husbands
were enamored with her. Shortly after her marriage, Elise
Bflrger wrote a letter to her mother expressing contentment
with her new lifestyle. She describes how those in their
social circle have picnics, dance, read, play the piano, and
play blind man's bluff. Nothing in her letter indicates any
disharmony between her and her husband. Bfirger's discontent
with his wife, on the other hand, surfaces when he writes a
letter to his mother-in-law (February 3, 1792) describing

Elise as lazy, wasteful, squanderous, and adulterous. He

 

37
states that there are caricatures of him as a cuckolded

husband circulating around the town because of his wife's
indiscretions. The fact that she would not have sexual
relations with him during her pregnancy led him to believe
that she was being unfaithful and that their child together
was not his, while she claimed that she found intercourse
painful. Their son Agathon, who was sickly and considered
mentally impaired, was born August 1, 1791. Elise Bflrger
was blamed for her son's ill health because she was unable
to produce enough breast milk to nourish him and a wet nurse
had to be hired. Bfirger not only viewed this a poor excuse
for her to relinquish her responsibilities as a mother, it
cost him money, something he had little of, even though she
brought 1,000 taler to the marriage.

Therese Huber's letter to her daughter quotes Elise
BHrger as saying that there was many a rendezvous during her
marriage but no relationships until one with Herr von
Hardenberg, a man with whom she was allegedly found in the
act. G. A. Burger admits that he often went through her
journal, where he found souvenirs and read about her
adventures. He also went to the postmaster, informed him of
his wife's activities, and forced him to relinquish a letter
addressed to her. After he read the letter, he went home to
his wife and spied on her through a hole he had bored
through her bedroom door. He writes: "Ich verschaffte mir
einen Bohrer, und bohrte an einer bequemen, nicht leicht

bemerklichen Stelle der Thfir ein solches Lochlein, daB ich

38
dadurch das ganze Sopha fibersehen konnte . . ." (Kinder

127).

After allegedly seeing the pair in the act through his
peep hole, he broke into her room, challenged his wife's
lover to a duel, and fought with her until he "misshandelt
sie mit Ohrfeigen" (Geiger 162), which she deserved a
thousand times more than he gave her: ”fiber ihr reitend
hielt ich mit den Knieen ihre Arme am Boden fest, und gab
ihr ein Dutzend derjenigen Ohrfeigen, die sie zu tausenden
verdiente . . ." (Kinder 132). Bfirger claimed to have seen
"die Hauptteile zusammen zu ffigen, und hatte es entweder
schon gethan, oder war nahe daran" on the sofa (Kinder 132).

After exerting physical force over his wife, Bfirger
presented the only tangible evidence he could find to bring
the charge of adultery against her, the letter he had
intercepted from the postmaster, in which she is addressed
with the familiar g3 by a man other than her husband.
Burger also named Philip Michalis, the brother of Caroline
Michaelis Schlegel Schelling, an adversary of Elise Bfirger,
in the court documents as one of her many alleged lovers.

Following the incident in her room, Elise Burger gave
her husband the incriminating letter back, said she was
leaving him, packed her belongings, signed over her rights
to her son, and admitted adultery "um die Scheidung zu
bewirken" (Geiger 162). The couple was divorced on March
31, 1792. Elise Burger was named the guilty party and

forbidden by the court ever to remarry (Eisenberg 138).

 

 

vent
she
want)
His :
lette
marrj
(Frex
but I
descr
Bfirge
She v
lOOkEt
again,
left i
ember:
relatj
Ca‘dsec'
damons
Career
two Y6
but Ki
Was a1
litera

brokEn

suppor'

39
The day after Burger left her husband, however, she

went to Hardenberg's sister, Frau von Marezoll, with whom
she had a trusted friendship. Hardenberg hurried to her and
wanted to make their relationship legal by marrying her.
His father, on the other hand, opposed the union and wrote a
letter to Elise Bfirger expressing his feelings, since all
marriages were forbidden unless sanctified by one's father
(Frevert 43). She considered Hardenberg's marriage proposal
but rejected it. Frau von Marezoll's husband, whom Huber
described as an "alter, ekelhafter Mann," fell in love with
Bfirger and she had no other choice but to leave the house.
She went to the home of Professor Trapp in Wolfenbfittel and
looked for a position as a Qeeelleehefrerin in Leipzig. But
again, the man of the house fell in love with her and she
left to visit her sick mother in Stuttgart. But she was
embarrassed by her reputation there and decided to stay with
relatives in Frankfurt. She became caught up in the unrest
caused by the French Revolution and took part in many
demonstrations, and it was then that she decided to make a
career out of acting. G. A. Bfirger's early death in 1794,
two years after their divorce, is often attributed to her,
but Kinder states that, although he was of ill-health, he
was also active in the revolution and pursued his own
literary endeavors, and did not merely fade away from a
broken heart as Schlegel-Schelling asserts (Kinder 163).
After leaving her husband, Bfirger's possibilities to

support herself were limited. Kinder states that she could

bec
mot
Act
391'
car:
die
hat
But
loss
exis
of 1
not

uniq

haVe
Prof
Were

(Joe

4O
become a mistress, try to regain her status as a good

mother, or learn a profession. She chose the latter.

Acting became Elise BUrger's passion and Heinrich Stfimke
agrees with Gisela Brinker-Gabler when he states that a
career as an actress: "ist noch immer der einzige, in dem
die Frau vbllige Gleichberechtigung mit dem Manne erlangt
hat und dem Mann ebenbfirtig zur Seite steht" (Stfimke 113).
But the price of increased independence was typically the
loss of social respectability. A problem for actresses
existed in the fact that there was no clearly defined system
of rights or representation for them. Actresses who were
not highly successful were encouraged, because of their
unique economic situation, to embellish their earnings
through the support of "interested" admirers. This seems to
have been condoned by their social circle as a part of their
profession, as they enjoyed greater moral freedom; actors
were not judged according to society's usual moral codes
(Joeres & Haynes 70).

Once out in the professional world of acting, Bfirger
was unable to passively take criticism of her acting
abilities from her adversaries. In 1801 she wrote fleer
EWWW
V- f.s:e .- Sc .-a e - .e .e. _a. _ 9-. -;-;t-ue ,,
in which she outlines her professional activities and
defends her talent. She went to Hamburg in September of
1796, educated herself as an actress with Professor

Schochers in Leipzig, and became a member of Altona's

41

Eerieeelrneerer (Bfirger firer meineg Aufentgalt in Hannover
5). She debuted as Lady Milford in Kabale ung Liebe and

lived in Altona for three years. In September of 1799 she
travelled to Bremen and was allowed to play roles such as
Ariadne, Klara von Hoheneichen, and Elvira in gellee_Ieg,
and she remained there for seven months, planning to return
the next year. She wanted to travel in the summer, get
acquainted with other actors and actresses and then return
in the winter to Bremen, and she also wanted to visit her
family, presumably her mother and son, whom she had not seen
in four years. Before she left Bremen, she obtained a
letter of recommendation from the director of the theater,
Dr. Schfitte, because she hoped to perform in Hannover
through which she would be passing.

On May 2, 1799 she played Ariadne in Hannover, which,
according to her, was well-received, and a few days later
she went on stage as Elvira. In addition to her theatrical
performances, she also mentions that she was "als
Schrifstellerin nicht unglficklicher in Hannover als ich es
als Schauspielerin gewesen war" (Bfirger 15). Elisabeth
Mentzel and Wolfgang von Wurzbach attribute the opposition
and competition she faced in Hannover to her success there.
Herr and Frau Reinhard, colleagues of Bfirger, are given
credit for the publication of G. A. Bfirger's
Ehestaggsgeschichte, a detailed account written by her
husband maligning her, in hopes of ruining her career. In

the 1912/13 Bfihge_eeg_flelr article "Neues fiber Elise

 

42
Bfirger," Elizabeth Mentzel writes that Reinhard's motivation

for publishing the letters was the fact that his wife had
almost every leading female role in the Hannover theater
until Elise Bfirger began performing there, whereas Wurzbach
states that Bfirger refused Reinhard's sexual advances and he
had the letters published as an act of revenge.

After leaving Hannover, Bfirger went to Celle, where she
was well-received. She performed her own play, Age;neirr
W. which
was a success, and she was invited to give a farewell speech
on the night of her last performance. The troupe had also
performed Lafontaine's Die Iochter der Narur, in which she
played a simple farm girl, a role, she says, the audience
was unaccustomed to seeing her play, since she lists her
specialties as "Heldinnen und Liebhaberinnen im Trauerspiel
(und) junge Weiber im Schau= und Lustspiel" (Bfirger 13).

Bfirger states that although she encountered some
problems with other actors and actresses (the Reinhards) and
was performing only small, secondary parts, her activities
as an author were encouraged. Some of her friends persuaded
her to write a piece in honor of Queen Charlotte's birthday.
She does not name the work, but Die firerrasehung (1801) is
dedicated to the queen, eliminating any ambiguity. It was
performed in Hannover but was not well-received and it was
not given a repeat performance. Bfirger does mention,
however, that a copy of the play coincidentally reached Herr

Meiers, the theater director in Stettin, and it was

43
performed there in honor of the Queen of Prussia (Bfirger 21-

22).

Confronting much criticism as an actress, Bfirger
continued to appear on the stage. One unpleasant
performance took place in Celle. As she made her entrance,
the stage was supposed to have been lit, but the person in
charge of the lamps forgot to illuminate them. She
staggered onto the stage, losing her balance in the dark,
and states that she won applause only because of her courage
to continue. Under fierce scrutiny from her fellow actors
and theater critics, any mishap on the stage could lead to
public ridicule and the loss of her position. Ironically, a
similar misfortune occurs to one of Bfirger's characters in
the play Qie_Heirereleerigeg (1801). Signora Zechini, a
famous opera singer, is forced into prostitution as a result
of her misfortune on the stage, which, according to Frevert,
was not a rare occurance. After that night's performance,
Bfirger left her position with the theater.

Elise Bfirger was a member of the courtly theater in
Dresden from 1802 until 1807 (Eisenberg 138) and thereafter
lived as a free actress, travelled, and appeared as a guest
actress in many larger cities in Germany, Austria, and
France (Kinder 176). She was accepted into the high society
of the nobility and had many correspondences with the
"greats" of her time. She earned money from her appearances
and began to specialize in "das lebende Bild”, from which

she achieved her greatest level of success. She arranged

44
texts with music and lighting effects and her preferred

material included recitations from Goethe, Schiller, and
Bfirger (Kinder 176). She also performed in the genre of
living images or "die plastisch=mimische Darstellung," as it
also came to be known, which consisted of living imitations
of famous scenes in literature, paintings, or history,
sometimes with recited texts in between, designed to be
educational. One of Bfirger's own works, Qie_eerike_§reree
ege_Flerene, is an example of the living image, as the
character Laura takes on the characteristics of a classical
statue. The images became popular and developed into short
scenes, and Bfirger portrayed ancient sculptures, scenes from
the bible, and fantasy-pantomimes. In 1813, for instance,
she portrayed a madonna figure from a work by Albrecht
Dfirer.

Bfirger continued to play roles from Shakespeare,
Lessing, Goethe, Schiller, Iffland, and Kotzebue, but in
1809 she was labeled a "politically suspicious person" and
was taken by the Viennese police to Hungary (Rotermund 301).
In 1820 she moved to Frankfurt am Main and taught acting,
but the number of students did not generate enough revenue
so she turned to writing occasional poetry for the nobility
and accepting money from benefactors, such as Frau Major
von Fechenbach from Mainz, the Markgrafin von Baden, the
crown princess from Prussia, and the empress of Austria.
Rotermund, however, states in his 1823 biographical entry

about Bfirger that: "Jetzt nennt sie sich Professorin der

45
Declamirkunst, welcher Regent ihr aber das Rescript zu

dieser Professur hat zusenden lassen, ist mir unbekannt”
(Rotermund 301). According to Kinder, she kept her
husband's title of Professor out of vanity, calling herself
"Professorin der Deklamation." Although she had little
money, she helped her stepson Emil, Bfirger's son with Molly,
gave free acting lessons, and bought meat and wood for a
sick neighbor (Laddey 128-29), which discounts her husband's
one-sided description of her as a self-serving squanderer.
Three years before her death in 1833, Elise Bfirger
began to go blind. After consulting her doctor, Dr. Schott,
it was decided that the only method of treatment would be
surgery at the eye clinic in Karlsruhe. Bfirger's hopes were
elevated, as she had a friend, Amalie Neumann-Haizinger, in
Karlsruhe, to whom she promptly wrote a letter asking
permission to visit during the surgery and to
remain thereafter to give performances (Eisenberg 138).
Bfirger states: "In C. ist meine liebe Amalie N. . . . o,
sie wird so glficklich sein, mich bei sich aufnehmen zu
kfinnen! Doctor, lieber Doctor, ich bin so gut wie gerettet!
. . ." (Laddey 128). When the reply came, Bfirger was unable
to read it and she sent for her student Hendrichs, who had a
position with the nearby Frankfurt theater. The reply
declined her request to visit, as her friend was travelling
to perform a guest role. According to Laddey's article,
Bfirger sank back in her chair, speechless; she now realized

that her career was over.

 

46
Although many critics claim Bfirger's career was

unsuccessful, the list of subscribers to her poetry, both
among the nobility and otherwise, was not non-existent.
Twenty-eight members of the nobility had subscriptions to
her poetic works, including multiple copies, totaling 150
copies. Other subscribers numbered 278 and including
multiple copies, a total of 340 copies sold, the revenue
from which kept her fed, clothed, and housed.

Personal and professional descriptions of Elise Bfirger
vary. On a personal level, Therese Huber found her company
quite enjoyable, while at the same time, Caroline Michaelis
Bfihmer Schlegel-Schelling scorned her and held her
responsible for Bfirger's death. On a professional level,
Schiller wrote a letter from Weimar to Goethe in Jena on May
5, 1802, during the time Bfirger was a guest performer in
Weimar. He states: ". . . denn diese Elise ist eine
armselige, herz- und geistlose Komfidiantin von der ganz
gemeinen Sorte, die durch ihre Ansprfiche ganz unausstehlich
wird." The criticism seems harsh but Schiller was known for
his intolerance for actors (Kinder 175). After seeing Elise
Bfirger perform as the queen in Don Carlos, Schillers' friend
Kfirner, on the other hand, reports on November 13, 1803:
”Sie sah sehr gut aus, spielte mit Verstand und Feinheit und
sprach auch im Ganzen nicht schlecht . . ." (Kinder 128).
Wieland also spoke in her defense: "Ich weiB nicht . . .
was die Heringsnasen in Weimar von ihr wollen; sie ist eine

ganz eminente Peson (sic) und hat ein excellentes Ingenium"

47
(Ebeling 175). Part of the controversy regarding her

performances presumably originated with the conflicting
theatrical styles. Bfirger played very naturalistically, as
was the practice in Altona, Hannover, and Dresden, the prime
locations of her experience, but in Weimar, the center of
Classicism, the art of acting was rigid and associated with
Greek and Roman antiquity (Kinder 175-76).

On November 24, 1833, 64 years and seven days old,
Elise Bfirger died. Only a few friends followed in her
funeral procession, the Hofrat Barthy, her student
Hendrichs, and her faithful maidservant. Her friends paid
for her burial costs and Barthy wrote her obituary, which
appeared in Qigeekelie. Arthur Richel mentions that Barthy
was one of the few who doubted Bfirger's guilt in her failed
marriage, and denounced the powerful prejudices against her.
Her only prized possession, her autograph book, was left to

her student Hendrichs.

ELISE Duncan's Ionxs

Elise Bfirger's works consist predominantly of dramas,
but she also produced novels, travel journals, diaries, and
poetry. This analysis of five of her plays demonstrates how
she shatters confining images set forth for women in a male-
dominated society (see Appendix A for synopses). Bfirger
proposes alternative role models for both men and women, as
her characters break away from mandatory domestication. Her
works present strong, independent protagonists instead of
those who are plagued with fainting spells and concerned
only with their virtue. Although her characters possess
virtuous qualities, Bfirger does not focus on legend,
Keeeehheir, and thmeehr to demonstrate these qualities.
Instead, she presents topics valuable to women in promoting
autonomy and self-awareness, described by Jeannine Blackwell
as ”critical, republican, socialist, utopian, or feminist"
(39).

Elise Bfirger's heroines are strong, independent,
capable women who do not need dominant male figures
overlooking or protecting them. In fact, her protagonists
defy, avoid, and even overtly criticize acts of dominance.
Her male characters also uphold egalitarian ideals and allow

women to exert their independence, and those male characters

48

49
who attempt to bring women under their control or who are

obsessed with money, power, and greed, are ridiculed and
inevitably become social outcasts.

Dagmar von Hoff provides a descriptive analysis of

women's dramatic efforts in Dramen des Weiblieheg: Deutsehe
premerikerigneg_em_;ggg. Notable techniques used in women's

works include presenting a female perspective, placing the
locus of action in the woman's sphere, usually the home,
creating female characters who speak for themselves, mixing
genres, bouting Liereemeleeehelie, and striving to maintain
an intact family unit. When analyzing women's works one
must also pay close attention to clothing, social class,
victim/hero roles, power struggles, and the predominance of
matriarchs or "enlightened" patriarchs. The term
"enlightened" is used here to identify those who advocate
freedom and equality for all people.

Based on a female body of works, von Hoff finds that
women employ a range of different forms and themes but one
thing remains constant, the presence of a female
perspective:

Gemeinsam ist ihren, daB in allen Dramen eine
'weibliche Perspektive' eingeffihrt wird, und
zwar in dem Sinne, daB eine weibliche Figur
im Mittelpunkt des dramatischen Geschehens

steht . . . (von Hoff 43).

50
Some female authors only present heroines of a high social

class, either queens, princesses, or other royal women;
Elise Bfirger, on the other hand, presents a wide range of
social classes, which suggests a utopian, egalitarian ideal.
Von Hoff suggests that by representing only the nobility,
the author strives to create an elevated ideal for a better
life (von Hoff 43-44). This can be seen especially in the
genre of the Biggerschauspie . By the nature of the
characters' social class in the Biggereeheeepiel, the dramas
often take place in castles, as the castle becomes a
protective wall against outside unpleasantness. This
protection lends itself to the preservation and maintainance
of the family unit (von Hoff 44, 50).

Another notable feature of women's works is the locus
of action. Since most women (authors) in real life were not
privy to the public sphere of their male counterparts, they
typically choose the home (castle) as the center for
activity in their works because of their familiarity in that
sphere. Von Hoff summarizes this phenomenon thus:

Die Burg [die private Sphare] fungiert dabei
als Ort der Geborgenheit, aber auch des
Einschlusses. FlieBende Zustande,
Handlungsmomente erstarren und verhfirten sich
zum Bild der uneinnehmenbaren Burg mit festen
Mauern . . . (von Hoff 69).

Another aspect of female dramas that distinguishes them

from those of their male counterparts is that the heroines

51
speak for themselves, whereas heros are usually exalted by

servants or advisors. Female characters in women's works
typically characterize themselves in the form of
conversations or in monologs, taking direct control of
situations and conflicts. It is in these monologs that they
reveal some type of suffering or victimization, usually at
the hands of a male (von Hoff 44-45).

Furthermore, instead of writing tragedies or comedies,
female authors tend to mix the two genres (as Schiller
indicates), often including tragic elements but resulting in
a happy ending. The final scene of women's works often
signifies the triumph over conflict and the return of
familial stability: "Diese SchluBtableau markiert das Ende
des Stfickes und fixiert weibliche Wunschvorstellungen eines
Familienglficks . . ." (von Hoff 69).

Women authors also break with the typical construction
of the male Bitterschauspiel, 66;; von Berliehiggen, for
example, in which the favorite theme of two men fighting
over one woman appears. The female Bitterschauspiel, such
as Bfirger's Agelheir, reverses this theme and, instead, two
women compete for the same man. Other aspects to be
considered in women's works are clothing, social class,
victim/hero roles, and the presence of matriarchs or
"enlightened" patriarchs, and language. By examining these
aspects, the feminist scholar can recognize elements
typically not present in men's works, which distinguish

women's works and reinforce a female perspective. Each of

52
the aforementioned elements of women's works will be

discussed as they pertain to the analysis of Bfirger's plays.
Elise Bfirger's single greatest literary success is her
play Win—file:
Agfizfigeg. In her analysis of the female version of the
Biggereehegeeiel, Dagmar von Hoff stresses that reversing
typically male images and techniques the female author is
underscoring her specifically female perspective. Instead
of two men fighting over a woman, Bfirger creates a situation
in which two sisters, Adelheit and Marie, are in love with
the same man, which is only part of the conflict. The other
part stems from the fact that Adelheit has been separated
from her family by her tyrannical father who forced her to
marry a man she did not love. The resolution of the
conflict begins when Adelheit's father dies, as does her
husband, and Adelheit and her mother Elsbet come into power.
By setting the drama in some non-specific time during the
medieval period, Bfirger seems to point out the extent to
which women were able to attain power as part of their
social class, such as Queen Laudine in Hartmann von Aue's
Inein, in contrast to a woman's position in her own society.
Another characteristic of the Bittersshausniel is the
presence of a female victim, but in women's works, the women
usually overcome victimization. Adelheit is constructed as
the victim when her father marries her off to the deplorable
count of Teck, but when he dies and she returns home in

hopes of rekindling her love for Georg, her sister Marie

53
assumes the victim role. Marie, who was sent to the convent

by her father (another form of victimization according to
Bfirger), has returned home as well, but when she realizes
that she cannot compete with Georg's love for Adelheit, she
offers to return to the convent, thus sacrificing her own
happiness.

Another element of the female drama is that the
protagonists characterize themselves through conversations
with the other characters, as suggested by von Hoff, rather
than through exaltations of her character from servants or
advisors. Adelheit is referred to as the "Herrin" of her
land and subjects, and when Georg decides to honor his
commitment to Marie, he states that Adelheit's manly
temperament (mannlicher Geist) will enable her to handle the
pain. She does not, however, intend to carry out passively
her female role and accept a fate decided for her, as she
had in the past. Adelheit directly tells the audience of
the victimization and tyranny she endured at the hands of
her father and husband: "Man schleppte mich zum Altar, man
gab mir einen Gemahl, den ich haBte. Vier Jahre lag ich im
Kampf zwischen Pflicht und Liebe" (48). Her direct speech
indicates that she does not need a spokesperson, reinforcing
the validity of the female perspective; she has the ability
to speak for herself.

Adelheit also recognizes that she is stronger than
Marie and feels a responsibility to her sister and to her

subjects:

54
Bin ich nicht des Leidens langst Vertraute,

bin stfirker als Marie, habe einen Sohn, der

die trfiben Stunden seiner Mutter doch nicht

freundenleer lassen wird, habe Pflichten

gegen meine Unterthanen, die mich

beschaftigen, zerstreuen werden . . . (49).
She also feels a responsibility for her own happiness and
refuses to allow another man to rule her life:

Ja, schon in den ersten Tagen meiner

Wittwenschaft schickte Staffeneck eine

Gesandschaft an mich; aber ich schlug seine

Hand aus . . . weil ich nicht zum zweitenmale

die Sklavin eines Tyrannen seyn wollte . . .

(53).
Adelheit clearly states her dislikes. The opportunity to
Speak for oneself during the eighteenth century was not
a"-'15'<>:l:‘ded to many women, while Bfirger makes it possible
within the constructed setting of the medieval period.

As the play progresses and Adelheit must return to Teck
t° Iplrotect her son, land, and subjects, she states with
°°urage and fire: "Ich bin Mutter und meine Tecker lieben
mich. Hart meinen Plan! Indefi wir Feind in den Rficken
fa‘llen, geben wir den Burgleuten ein Zeichen zum Ausfall - "
(64 ) . After Conrad, Georg's fellow knight, hears Adelheit's
Plan, he states: "Weiber taugen nicht in Schlachtgetfimmel!
' - .” (64) to which Adelheit tells him that her son and

land are at stake and she knows the area and the secret

55
paths. Most important, however, is her direct self-

characterization: "Seh, ich bin stark, ich kann ein
Schwerdt wohl ffihren. Mutterliebe wird mich zur Heldin
machen . . . Schlafert die L6win nicht ein, die ffir ihren
Jungen kampfen will . . . ich muB ihn befreyen" (66).
Furthermore, when Stauffeneck and his men capture

Adelheit and she is asked about her (her/his) identity, she
retorts: "fibrigens bin ich ein Ritter, ein freyer und
ebenbfirtiger Mann . . ." (87) , indicating that her
capabilities are no less than a man's, even though she is a
woman, and she does not deserve any less freedom. Moreover,
Wurst suggests that the very fact that Adelheit wears a suit
of armor and assumes a "Hosenrolle," adds to the intrigue of
the play, especially appealing to a voyeueristic element in
the audience:

. . . das (mannliche) Publikum wird ebenfalls

eine fast voyeuristisch zu nennende

Faszination mit der Schauspielerin in einer

Hosenrolle entwickeln. Denn die Frau in Hose

und Wams wird ja weder zum adrogyn a-

geschlichtlichen Wesen noch zu einer wirklich

mannlichen Erscheinung, sondern das Spiel mit

der Verkleidung lenkt vielmehr die

Aufmerksamkeit vor allem des weiblichen

Kfirper, der sonst durch die Gegebenheiten der

weiblichen Kleidung verdeckt ist (z. B. das

sonst bedeckt und verhfillte Bein).

56
Paradoxerweise betont die mannliche Kleidung

somit die weibliche Form . . . (Wurst 100).
When Adeleit's identity is discovered and Stauffeneck wants
to have his way with her, she defends herself: "Weg mit
deinen Handeni ich verlange deinen BrautkuB nicht. Ehe
verschlinge ich das Grab, als ich dein Weib werde! . . ."
(90).

The mistrust for tyrannical men also surfaces when Ida
and the other women take refuge at the hermit's home and she
sings:

. . . Drum Madels, traut dem falschen Blick
der schfinen Manner nie!

Sie scherzen nur mit eurem Glfick,

drum, Madels, fliehet sie!

Sonst heiBts: 0 web! 0 weh! . . . (105).

A female perspective is further demonstrated when
Adelheit is reunited with her son and her subjects after
fighting to get to the castle. Adelheit is the one who
tells the story of their triumph, reminiscent of
storytelling in medieval epics: "Ich kam glficklich nach
Augsburg, dort erfuhr ich die Belagerung meiner Burg und
eilte selbst in dieser Kleidung mit dem Schwerdt in der
Hand, meine Rechte zu vertheidigen . . ." (116). When the
whole group is reuinited, Adelheit asks Georg to swear an
oath to love and protect her son always and she makes the
impending marriage contingent on the fulfillment of her

wish.

 

 

57
Adelheit has fought side by side with Georg and she

proves to herself that she can provide for and defend
herself. Once she overcomes conflict by physically fighting
in the war against male tyranny, she is ready to become
Georg's wife, since the role of wife no longer threatens her
autonomy or her son's safety. Bfirger does not denounce
typical female roles but she does denounce enforced
domesticity. It is because of her role as mother that she
is able to don courageously the male suit of armor and carry
the typically male weapon, the sword. Adelheit is feminine
yet she is also aggressive and assertive, and she is
satisfied with the roles she chooses, not the roles chosen
for her.

The victim role in this drama was originally played by
Adelheit, but after her husband and father die she takes
control of her own destiny. The victim role is then shifted
to Marie, who was first victimized by being placed in the
convent by her father and now plans to return because she
cannot have Georg's love. She too takes control of her
destiny to a certain extent, with her decision not to marry
Conrad when he states: ". . .LaBt das Kloster den
BfiBerinnen und werdet ein braves Ritterweibi. . ." (137).
Her reply indicates that she will no longer play a passive,
victimized role in the cloister. Instead, she too, makes
her own decision:

Marie: ". . . Herr Ritter, Euer Antrag ehrt

mich sonder Zweifel; aber ich kann nicht

 

58
so schnell zusagen, wie ihr werben. Die

Zeit wird mich Euch naher kennen lernen
und denn --”
Conrad: So laBt Ihr mir doch Hoffnung? -
Ichdanke Euch und warte gern. . . (140).
Another common element of women's works, as von Hoff
suggests, is that women authors create the castle or the
home as a protective environment for women and their
families. At the beginning of Ageiheir, for instance, the
family is not intact. Adelheit is a 30 hour's journey away
in Teck and her brother Hans is missing. Once Adelheit
returns and the family takes their separate routes to Teck,
leaving the protection of the castle, conflict builds.
Adelheit is captured by Stauffeneck's men and Elsbet, Marie,
and Ida are betrayed by the hermit. The family is reunited
in Teck, however, and the conflict which drove them apart is
resolved. Conrad proposes marriage to Marie, saving her
from self-sacrifice, Georg agrees to the terms Adelheit
expects for marriage, and even the servants, Ida and Edgar,
decide to marry, with the grand matriarch Elsbet blessing
them all, as von Hoff summarizes:
Diese SchluBtableau markiert das Ende des
Stfickes und fixiert weibliche
wunschvorstellungen eines Familienglficks.
Die Burg fungiert dabei als Ort der
Geborgenheit, aber auch des Einschlusses.

FlieBende Zustande, Handlungsmomente

59
erstarren und verhfirten sich zum Bild der

uneinnehmenbaren Burg mit festen Mauern . . .

(von Hoff 69).
The end of the drama brings several of the elements of
women's works together simultaneously. The family unit is
restored, the action takes place within the protective walls
of the home (Adelheit's castle), women bear power positions,
and conflict is overcome, which all support a female
perspective.

The characterization of the Bfirger's male characters is
also important. Bfirger constructs Georg and the Count of
Stauffeneck as polar opposites. Georg represents all that
is good, decent, and chivalrous. He is willing to abandon
his love for Adelheit and honor his promise to Marie.
Stauffeneck, on the other hand, destroys his knightly honor
when he tries to take Adelheit by force. Georg is portrayed
as Adelheit's partner and as such they battle side by side.
Stauffeneck tries to exploit Adelheit, desiring her not for
her love but for her money, land, and reproductive
abilities. It seems that the idea of women being used as
chattel is displeasing to Bfirger and she chooses to
communicate her feelings by criticizing practices of the
Medieval period even though they were still practiced during
her lifetime.

Particularly notable is how Stauffeneck becomes a
social outcast after he is captured by Adelheit's allies.

She pleads with the angry mob to show him mercy. But when

60
Georg offers Stauffeneck foregiveness, Stauffeneck tells him

to go to the devil, and he is thereafter banished from the
castle. Stauffeneck's greed earns him dishonor and
ostracism, which is a device Bfirger often uses when male
characters who use force or deceit to achieve a goal become
social outcasts.

The next analysis focuses on Bfirger's Sehegepiel Dee
Beggee_. The play is female-centered, focusing on the
protagonist Amalie and the relationships with those around
her. Bfirger remains true to the favorite theme of men's
literary works of two men fighting over a woman, but the
difference exists in the fact that, similar to Adelheit, the
protagonist maintains control of the situation.

From the very beginning of the play, Amalie's
independent, outspoken character can be seen. Madam Blond,
who is in charge of Amalie's education and upbringing,
accuses her of interrupting and contradicting, two
undesirable traits for women in the eighteenth century.
Amalie, however, continues to express her views openly. For
instance, when Madam Blond scolds her for frolicking in the
fields, Amalie replies:

Amalie: 0 so las mir doch die unschuldige Freude!
Die Blumen waren von je her meine Lieblinge,
und es ist so ein liebes natfirliches
Vergnfigen, was der liebe Gott uns giebt! -
GewiB Bonncheni wenn ich heirathe und Mutter

werde, so will ich mich zwischen meine Kinder

61
setzen und Blumen pflficken und Kranze mit

ihnen winden.

Juliette (Spfittisch): Aber der Teint, liebes
Fraulein! der Teint wird bei dieser schfinen
Mutterbeschfiftigung gewaltig leiden!

Amalie: Wenn mein Mann mich liebt, wird es ihm
einerlei sein, ob ich ein bchhen schwfirzer
bin oder nicht . . . (8).

Amalie has preconceived notions about marriage and how
she wants to be treated and she does nothing to conceal her
feelings. This can be seen especially when Juliette reveals
that the Rittmeister has come to ask for Amalie's hand.
Madam Blond states:

Comment! was sagst Du Juliette! der Graf hat

um Amaliens Hand gebeten und ohne erst zu mir

zu kommen, da er weifl, daB ich Mutterstelle

bei ihr vertrete! cela est impardonnable.

But Amalie retorts:

WeiBt Du, Juliette! was ich unverzeihlicher

finde? - daB der Herr Graf nicht erst bei mir

recognoscirt hat! . . . (9-10)

Bfirger could very easily have written the character of
Amalie as that of a victim, but instead, she seems to combat
that image. Amalie's obvious distaste for not being
consulted directly about her future would never be
challenged by a character such as Emilia Galotti, but Bfirger

makes patriarchal authority over marriage an issue and she

62
remedies it through the bouquet competition, eliminating the

dominant patriarch figure.

Bfirger uses flowers as a metaphor for femininity to
employ "typical" female characteristics to Amalie's
advantage. Delicate, beautiful, fragrant, and petite are
adjectives often used when describing flowers, which are
also often used to describe women in men's works. Bfirger
recognizes the similarity and uses it as a means to
demonstrate Amalie's cleverness to detect the intentions of
the greedy suitors whose bouquets reveal how they will treat
her after marriage. The Rittmeister's bouquet has many
cultivated, beautiful flowers, yet their beauty is stifled
when bound tightly with a sash and bow, bringing them under
his control. Amalie recognizes that the same fate awaits
her if she marries him. The Kammerjunker's bouquet is
colorful, yet superficial, representing his true character
and underlying reasons for marriage - power, money, and
control. Both bouquets, therefore, are rejected.

Amalie is excited about the prospect of suitors and
getting married but she refuses to marry someone who will
treat her poorly. Her ideal suitor does exist, however, and
he brings her a bouquet of wild, natural flowers, loosely
kept near his heart. A marriage with Carl is not
threatening to her because she sees how he will treat her as
revealed through his treatment of the flowers. Bfirger's
metaphorical use of flowers serves as a mechanism to tear

down the image of women as delicate, passive objects and,

63
instead, to use the image as a form of power. The flower as

a metaphor for delicate womanhood is turned into a test by
this woman to gauge the character of her suitors. The
result is a portrayal of the female protagonists as
outspoken, active partners, again representing a female
perspective.

Another important element in women's works are the
relationships of the protagonists with those around them.
Amalie's relationship with Carl is one of mutual respect, as
is her relationship with her father, which shatters typical
images of male/female and father/daughter relationships
represented in men's works in the eighteenth century.

Amalie's relationship with her father is also a
sentimental one. Even when Amalie says ”Punctum!" to her
father, in her outspoken manner, he finds her endearing,
because she reminds him of his deceased wife. He states
that if his wife were still alive, he would not care if the
war came to an end, he would welcome peace. When he becomes
frustrated after reading a newspaper account which predicts
the end of the war, he tells Amalie that he wishes she had
been a son who could heroically fight and be the source of
honor and pride for him. To this, Amalie replies that she
has learned soldiers' activities: ". . .O Vater! Den
Dienst kann ich wohl als Madchen verstehen; unser seliger
Heinrich hat mich exerciren gelehrt, wenn's die Madame nicht
sah, und ich hatte eine groBe Freude daran. . ." (24). Her

father patronizes her when they discuss her participation in

64
the gender-specific activity, but he also loves and respects

her, admitting that she has him wrapped around her little
finger.

In this play, Bfirger tears down the superficial notion
that physical attractiveness is a prerequisite for marriage.
In her own experience, for example, she was not considered
an appropriate spouse for Gottfried August Bfirger until he
had first evaluated his "merchandise", Elise Hahn, in
person. Although Bfirger had received a portrait of the
raven-haired beauty, he was not satisfied because she did
not resemble the golden-haired Molly, whom he still mourned,
and suggested that she powder her hair, as the superficial
Kammerjunker had done in this play. Bfirger's personal
experience with the superficiality of appearance as a
prerequisite for marriage only supports her position when
she tears that image down in this work. The powder in the
Kammerjunker's hair, the strong perfume he wears, and his
Parisian dancing shoes, however superficially impressive, do
not make him a suitable marriage partner for Amalie nor do
they make him a good person. In fact, he moans about how
boring she is, remarking on her plainness, whereas he, on
the other hand, is pretentious and flambouyant. He only
wants to marry her for her fortune: "Das Madchen ist
hfibsch, - aber fade, sehr fade. Nur ihr Geld ist bon, tres
bon! . . ." (41).

Carl, on the other hand, appears with Amalie's favorite

flowers, which are wild, natural, and unbound. Physical

65
appearance, a main concern of the Kammerjunker, is of little

relevance to her, since Carl's face has been badly scarred
in the war. Control, a concern of the Rittmeister, is of
little importance to Carl, for he accepts Amalie's marriage
proposal, an atypical act for a woman in the eighteenth
century. After seeing the flowers Carl brings, she knows he
will treat her with respect, just like he treats the
beautiful flowers.

Similar to the Kammerjunker, the Rittmeister also finds
fault with Amalie. He refers to her as ”naseweis,"
indicating to her father that he would modify her behavior.
He intends to bring Amalie under his control just as he does
the bouquet. His only interest in her is as a reproductive
vessel rather than as a marriage partner.

The manner in which each of the two suitors obtain
their bouquets indicates another part of their character
which would not deem them good husband material. Neither
the Kammerjunker nor the Rittmeister picked or chose their
bouquets themselves. The Kammerjunker obtained his bouquet
through questionable means, by having his servant steal it,
and the Rittmeister had his servants assemble his bouquet
from the flowers in his greenhouse. This occurs even after
Amalie tells them that natural flowers in the fields are the
most beautiful; they proceed to obtain their bouquets
artificially and superficially.

Amalie's bouquets serve as a mechanism to test how the

suitors intend to treat her. From their treatment of the

66
bouquets, one would predict that neither suitor will pay

attention to what she says, even when her message is clear
(her preference for fresh, wild flowers). Moreover, this
also suggests that the Kammerjunker is likely to be
deceitful and the Rittmeister will be likely to abandon her
to be cared for by the servants. Carl, on the other hand,
is completely unaware of the competition and appears with
Amalie's favorite flowers, reinforcing the natural (as
opposed to artificial) love they will share.

Again, the setting and ending of the play, as well as
an intact family, are important in portraying a female
perspective typically found in women's works. The setting
for the play is the heroine's home, here the Obrist's
castle. After Amalie rejects the bouquets from the two
suitors, they are forced to leave the source of protection,
safety, and comfort for the (re)united family. Similar to
what Elsbet had done in Adelheir, Amalie's father, an
”enlightened" patriarch who refuses to force his daughter
into marriage, blesses the union between Amalie and Carl.
Carl's return marks the end of the war and restores the
family unit, resulting in a happy ending.

Accompanying Das Dougeer is the Nachspiel Die
Heiratslusrigen. In this work Elise Bfirger touches on
democratic ideals, which were highly popular before and
after the French Revolution and also inspired by the
independence from the British found in the "New World."

This quasi-Bobineonade revolves around a group of betrothed

67
couples who sail off to the West Indies to create new

destinies based on freedom and democracy.

This farsical play is entertaining but it also
describes the substantial effects of the revolution on
different classes of people, particularly the lower and
middle classes. Unlike Bfirger's other dramas, it has no
central female protagonist. Instead, it describes the story
of an English lord who, in the tradition of many male
utopias, wants to start a new colony in the West Indies.

His patriarchal behavior at the beginning of the play is
eliminated at the end by his own participation with the
other couples.

The interviews each candidate must undergo at the inn
in Amsterdam in order to be accepted for the journey reveal
the effects of the revolution on each character and how they
decide to deal with their own situations. The equal number
of men and women, the equal opportunity for each of them to
begin their lives anew, as well as the equal amount of money
they receive for their participation indicates Bfirger's
utopian, egalitarian ideas. Only once does a power struggle
take place and it occurs between a maid and her former rich
employer-turned-missionary. The incident elicits the
following response from Seiber: "Im Himmelreich sind wir so
alle gleich . . ." (106).

Although the emphasis is not on marriage for love and
partnership, as indicated in Bfirger's other works, the

candidates each enter into the marriages on their own

 

v0]
ma]
on:

wi

lln
10
0f

Enc'

68
volition via a lottery, rather than being forced into

marriage by a dominant father figure. The father figure, if
one is to be identified, Lord Seiber, tells them that fate
will decide whom they marry.

Again, Bfirger remains true to a female perspective by
giving her characters occupations, such as a chambermaid, a
governess, a saleswoman, an opera singer, and ballet dancer,
but they are not highly respected by society. With the
exception of the governess, each woman wants to leave the
country and marry to pursue and improve her career in the
West Indies, not to give themselves over into the servitude
of their husbands. Marriage, often a potentially confining
situation, promises instead to allow them to pursue the
ideals of the revolution, that each person is a thinking,
reasoning, creature with basic human rights which are not
specific to the social class into which they were born. The
trip to the West Indies, or as they refer to it, "Amerika,"
is significant, for in the land of opportunity and new
beginnings the forthcoming marriages need not be confining,
but rather liberating.

The setting, happy ending, and the intact family all
play a part in Die fieiretsluetigen. This play is not set in
a fortress or a castle with strong walls to keep
unpleasantness away, instead Bfirger sets the stage at a
local inn, a common meeting place or "home" for the classes
of people she writes about. As in the other plays, a happy

ending results when the Seiber himself becomes a participant

 

69
and his "family" unit is complete with the arrival of

Jungfrau Frfihlich, whom he intends to marry. In keeping
with the tradition of the utopia genre, in which all members
of a society are equal, all the participants sing praises
and bless themselves rather than being blessed by a
figurehead:.

sind wir in Amerika,

Wollen frei wir leben,

mit den lieben Sacken da

uns den Wohlstand geben;

jeder nimt sein Weib in Arm,

Geld und Liebchen winken;

frei von Sorgen, frei von Harm

Wollen wir dort trinken! . . . (129).

The next play, Die Uberrasehugg, could be classified as

a family portrait, one of the types of Iriyiellirerergr
Schiller found most disgraceful. It was written in honor of
Queen Charlotte's birthday in 1801. The main action takes
place at Frau Marthe's modest home in the country and
concerns the marriages of her four daughters. Another
family is represented as well, the noble family Lindheim,
for whom Marthe worked as a wet nurse. In this play, Bfirger
praises motherhood across all social levels. Again, the
female characters directly communicate their own valuable
characteristics. Marthe's abilities as a mother are lauded,
as are those of Sophie, and Bfirger goes one step further and

directly compliment's Queen Charlotte's abilities as well.

70
One of the main characters, Sophie, is characterized

through conversations with her parents. Sophie's husband
Fritz has been gone for several months and her feeling of
loss on her wedding anniversary is consoled by her father
who characterizes her as a strong heroine: "Unsre Sophie
ist stark. Siehst du, meine Heldinn weint nicht! . . ."

(18). Her mother consoles her by stating: "Gott wird ja
ein so gutes treues Weib wie du bist, nicht elend machen

. . ." (19).

Sophie is mourning the loss of Fritz, which von Hoff
suggests is common in women's works, when protagonists are
forced to marry men they do not love, or when a long
separation between partners occurs. The forced marriages or
separations can lead to a state of Lieeeemelenenelie. For
instance, when Adelheit thinks Georg has been killed in the
battle, she prays that she can die as well so they can be
together eternally. Likewise, Sophie states: "Gott! Wenn
du meine Thrfinen siehst, so erbarme dich meines Jammers!
Lafi ein treues liebendes Weib ihren Gatten wieder finden.
Gieb meinen Kindern ihren Vater wieder, oder laB mich mit
ihm sterben! . . .” (24).

The female perspective can also be seen in Marthe's
actions and self-characterization. Marthe is protective and
directly characterizes herself as being strict when she
tries to protect her daughters from over-anxious suitors:
"Aber ich habe sie gehfitet wie meine Augen, und alle junge

Bursche ffirchten sich vor mir . . ." (7).

71 _
The recurring theme of single parenthood and the self-

reliance of women also seems to be important to Bfirger,
since she too, was a single parent. Marthe's husband died
when her youngest daughter was two years old and she is
faced with the sole responsibility of raising their four
daughters. Other examples of single parents in Bfirger's
works are Elsbet, Adelheit, and the Christ von Weng.

Even though Marthe is a single mother she knows that
she has been a good mother but her only regret is that she
cannot provide dowries for her four daughters. Sophie's
husband Fritz considers Marthe's role in Sophie's life
valuable, and he enters the picture to provide what she
lacks, ample money for each daughter. Marthe does not
recognize Fritz but accepts his generous offer because she
has no other way of providing dowries for her daughters,
which brings about the happy ending.

Furthermore, the protection of the home and the intact
family also contribute to the happy ending. Although there
is no castle to protect the family unit from the outside
unpleasantness as in the Birrereeneeepiel, Marthe's modest
home takes its place. When Fritz returns to Sophie, their
family is intact. Similarly, when Marthe's daughters begin
their married lives, unity in her family is achieved as
well. Furthermore, Bfirger's democratic ideas can be seen in
the the connection between the noble and lower class
families, reinforced by the mother/daughter relationship

loetween Marthe and Sophie's and the presence of the two

72
families celebrating the birthday of the queen together.

Louise, Sophie's mother, another matriarch, praises the
queen and asks that she bestow a blessing on the gathering:
O mfige Sie, die stets mein Vorbild war, deren
hfiusliche Tugenden die Anbetung Ihrer
Unterthanen verdient, jetzt in diesem
Augenblick, von der Hfihe Ihres Throns einen
Blick auf unseren kleinen zirkel zurfick
werfen, und sehen, wie innig und herzlich ein
Hauschen guter Menschen Sie verehrt . . .
(25) .
Rather than having separate celebrations of the queen's
birthday, the two families come together as a single unit,
and the Obrist of Lindheim and his wife bless them all,
bringing the play to an end.

The final play, Die agrike Seerue aue Flerenz (1815),
is the last of Elise Bfirger's plays. Written in alexandrine
verse, Bfirger adopts a style which alludes to Classicism.
Images of beauty in Sreree venerate classical art and
suggest them as examples. The protagonist's husband Ludwig
is constantly engaged in activity tied to classical art in
the secret, yellow room. Rather than passively watch her
marriage crumble, Laura goes to the room, learns its secret,
and regains the love of her husband. Ludwig's obsession
with classical art has caused him to discard his wife. But
Iby challenging the fact that women are often evaluated by

societal norms rather than personal merit, Laura breaks down

73
this "reality" and regains the love of her husband. Some

may argue that Laura's methods to regain her husband, such
as dressing as the statue to conform to societal norms, but
it is by conforming that she is able to bring her husband to
a new "reality" that does not judge women as objects or hold
them up to art as examples.

At first, Laura is willing to accept her husband's
behavior and go to her uncle, but her sister compels her to
realize that her husband is embracing intellectual values,
and in order to break the tradition to which he has fallen
victim, she must dress as the statue to regain his love and
respect. It is because of this conflict that she can
confidently pronounce: "Mein Spiegel sagt mir doch, ich sey
nicht schlecht gebaut / Nun denn, 0 Laura, einmal nur dir
selbst vertraut! . . ." (17-18). She accepts and desires
her role as a wife, but she does not accept being compared
to lifeless objects.

Laura rejects being compared to an ideal of the
perfect woman and she shatters the ideal, calling it a
"kalte Puppe." Ironically, the statue, or the ideal,
literally shatters into dust. Bfirger calls the play a
Seherzepiel, in hopes of attracting an audience to a
humorous play while veiling a message about the subjugation
of women conforming to men's ideals. Ludwig is convinced
that only things classical or coming from Antiquity are

Ibeautiful and worth adoration.

74
This play addresses the issue of men imagining women as

more than the human beings that they are. A man's fantasy
of how a woman should be, is, in this case, nothing short of
perfection. She must have a perfect body, perfect
upbringing and perfect breeding. When this image breaks
down and Ludwig realizes that Laura is not perfect, he is
drawn to his ideal of perfection, the classical statue:
Doch ist sie gar nicht schfin, sie hat gemeine
Formen,
Kein hohes EbenmaB, sie pafite zu Herrn Ormen.
Hfitt der sie nur gefreyt, das war wohl noch
ein Paar!
Zwar liebte damals ich ach, schon sind es
sechs Jahr -
An ihr Tugend Reiz, doch der ist lfingst
vergangen,
Jetzt ist mein Aug' gewfihnt an edleres
Verlangen . . . (8).
When he sees her as the statue, however, he marvels at her
beauty, praising the same qualities he previously maligned.
The dialog in this play represents a female perspective
in that it predominantly revolves around Laura and her
sister. When Laura resolves to abandon her marriage, her
sister provides her with support and encourages her to take
charge of the situation rather than give up: "Erobre Deinen
Mann zum zweitenmal als Stein / Du sollst sein Ideal bis zum

Verlieben seyn . . ." (21). After Ludwig realizes what he

 

 

75
has done to his wife, he makes the following vow: "Ja, ja,

ich bin es ganz, bin hochbeglfickt / Durch solche zarte List
bezaubert und entzfickt / Ich schwfire Dir, ich suche nimmer
fremde Formen . . ." (27).

Bfirger's message is far from clandestine when Laura's
sister Rosaura gives advice to other women by speaking
directly to the audience:

Ihr Damen! Beispiel nehmt an diesem
Frauenzimmer
Zeigt euren Mannern euch in neuen Formen
immer.
Der Neuheit Reiz, und war er manchmal auch
geborgt,
Ist einzig nur die Fee, der Mannersinn
gehorcht . . . (19).
One might argue that by overtly telling her female audience
to constantly change to please her man, she is accepting
male expectations. But one must remember that the genre
employed here is a Seherzspiel and by directly telling her
female audience to please her man, she may be poking fun at
the ridiculousness of the situation, hence giving an
opposite, covert message. The final result is Ludwig's oath
never to take his wife for granted or to seek pleasure in
other forms; the end result, therefore, justifies the means

by which it was achieved.

76
After Ludwig comes to his senses and makes his vow to

his wife, Rosaura's pronouncement ends the play: "Ich
kranze sie, die ist antik, modern und ewig schfin" (28).
Restoring the relationship between Laura and Ludwig brings
the family together, in the same manner as Bfirger's other
plays, resulting in a happy ending within the protective
walls of the home.

Both overt and covert messages are revealed in Elise
Bfirger's works. The works themselves and the forms they
take resist the accepted, dominant literary style and create
a new, innovative medium used to reveal her covert messages.
The theater-goer who plans to see a Scherzspie; may see only
the apparent, humorous message, in the case of Statue, that
women can be conniving, manipulative creatures. But the
same theater-goer may be completely oblivious to the covert
message that freedom and equality are basic rights to which
all people are entitled, irrespective of gender, and
furthermore, that women, as well as art, should not be held
up to unrealistic, arbitrary ideals. It could be argued
that by keeping her messages covert, Bfirger's efforts were
in vain. But by overtly challenging the status quo, any
chance for her works to be read or performed might be
eradicated, which would endanger her primary goal, to

generate enough money to earn a living.

re)
cor
one
bet
Sec
is

pat
rul
bei

of

0ft

CONCLUSION

In summary, a close reading of Elise Bfirger's works
reveal three themes. First, marriage should be a non-
confining institution. Women should marry according to
one's own choice instead of for money or a good union
between families decided by a domineering patriarch.
Second, freedom, equality, and democracy are valued. This
is seen in the presence of matriarchs or "enlightened"
patriarchs rather than male-dominated, family and political
rule. And third, men and women should be viewed as human
beings, rather than members of a social class or as objects
of beauty.

One of Bfirger's central themes is marriage, which is
often portrayed by authors as an institution of domination
in the eighteenth century. However, when a successful
male/female relationship is portrayed in Elise Bfirger's
works, the couple works together as a team, as in the dramas
Ageiheir and Die Uberraschung. Bfirger uses marriage as a
non-confining institution in all five of the plays.
Adelheit's first marriage was arranged by her father to form
a solid union between families and territories. She was not
allowed to choose her husband and she states how unhappy she

was as a result. Women's desire to speak for themselves or

77

78
protect themselves against a "good union" in the absence of

love was often denied them, but Elise Bfirger makes it
possible for Adelheit. This is demonstrated, as von Hoff
suggests, by the female character taking charge of her own
destiny through direct, active, self-characterization. At
the end of the play when Adelheit marries Georg, it is a
marriage motivated by love and mutual respect, not by land
or power.

The marriage theme appears again in Dee_DeDgDer as
Amalie seeks to determine whom she will marry. She does not
want to marry either of the two suitors after she discovers
how they intend to treat her. Her father, unlike
Adelheit's, declares that he will not force her to marry any
man, including the one he has in mind for her, if she does
not love him. Her freedom of choice makes marriage a non-
confining situation. When Carl arrives with his natural,
non-threatening bouquet, Amalie enters into a marriage with
a childhood friend and partner.

The marriage in gretee is initially confining. After
confiding in her sister about her discontent with her
marriage, Laura realizes that she and her husband loved each
other deeply at one time, and she aggressively decides to
recapture that love. But when her husband compares her to
the classical beauty of a statue, with which she feels she
will never compare favorably, she conforms to the ideal only
to force him to realize that his obsession with classical

art is impractical and limiting. Instead of forcing her to

79
continue imitating the statue, Laura's husband realizes the

beauty of the woman he married, changing the status of their
marriage from confining to liberating.

The marriage theme in Die_DDerreeeDDDg is demonstrated
through the love of Marthe's oldest daughter Lieschen and
her beau Tfiffel. They have little money but Taffel earns an
honest living and they want to marry for love and
partnership as they state:

T6ffel: . . . denn ein ehrlicher Schaferknecht
bin ich all mein Lebstage gewesen, und
arbeiten kann ich noch nebenbei, also -

Lieschen: Ach was also! - ich habe auch zwei
Hande und bin jung und stark . . . (9).

Tfiffel: Lieschen Du bist meine tausend Thaler
. . . (21).

Other non-confining marriages can be found in Die
firerreeeheng such as those of Marthe's other daughters, the
marriage between Sophie and Carl, and the marriage between
the king and queen.

The marriage theme is prominent in Die Heiretsiusrigen,
as the title suggests. The participants in the trek to the
West Indies are not marrying for love, however, but rather
to liberate themselves from a repressive, chaotic world at
the time of the French Revolution. They give up their right
to choose their spouses and regard their upcoming marriages
as partnerships in order to start their lives anew, separate

from the vicious practices of the male world.

80
The second theme in Bfirger's plays is freedom and

equality among all people, especially exemplified by
matriarchies or "enlightened" patriarchies. The two
matriarchs in Ageiheir, Adelheit and her mother Elsbet,
prove that they can survive after they are widowed. Both
women assume their own destinies by accepting their roles as
rulers. Adelheit fights to maintain her autonomy and she
and her mother curse the oppressive man, Adelheit's father,
who forced Adelheit to wed a tyrant. When challenged by
Stauffeneck, she states: "fibrigens bin ich ein Ritter, ein
freyer und ebenbfirtiger Mann . . ." (87). She dresses as a
man only to defeat one, another example of a reversed image.

The widowed matriarch Marthe in Die_firerreeeheeg, alone
cares for her four daughters on a meager income. The
presence of a woman as head of the household perhaps
suggests Bfirger's opinion that one can maintain a household
without dominating its inhabitants, which reinforces
Blackwell's assertion that women's works are often
"critical, republican, socialist, utopian, or feminist"
(Blackwell 39).

The enlightened patriarch of Dee_Deegger is Amalie's
father, the Obrist von Weng. Rather than force his daughter
to marry only for the sake of uniting two families or
territories, he listens to his strong-minded daughter and
respects her decisions. He also listens to the servant
Jeremis, rejecting Madam Blond's superficiality and lies in

her attempt to incriminate the servant. Another Patriarch,

81
Lord Seiber, provides equality, freedom, and a sense of

democracy for the "Heirathslustigen" as they embark on a
journey to the new world in hopes of improving their lives.
Each couple must give up its choice of a spouse to the lord,
in a typical patriarchal manner reminiscent of utopias
written by men. But the difference exists in the lord's
participation with them rather than ruling over them; he
becomes a member of the group, alluding to utopian ideals.
All the people come from different parts of Europe, they all
receive the same amount of money, they give up their right
to choose a spouse, and they sail on to "Amerika" to form a
new colony and a new fate. Living freely, among people of
other nationalities, races, and ages contributes to this
egalitarian ideal theorized by the ”great" thinkers of Elise
Bfirger's time but, ironically, in reality did not apply to
women. In her works, however, egalitarian ideals do apply.
The third theme Bfirger addresses is judging men and

women based on their appearance. Bfirger's drama, Dee
Deegeer conveys her view that women should be able to carry
out their chosen roles as housekeeper, wife, and mother,
according to their natural inclinations for these roles.
Amalie states:

Wenn ich heirathe und Mutter werde, so will ich

mich zwischen meine Kinder setzen und Blumen

pflficken und Kranze mit ihnen winden . . . wenn

mein Mann mich liebt, wird es ihm einerlei sein,

82
ob ich ein bischen schwfirzer bin oder nicht . . .

(8).
Bfirger's de-emphasis of appearance suggests that women are
not superficial trinkets to be admired. Amalie refuses to
be treated as merely a beautiful decoration designed for the
pleasure and enjoyment of a man. The condition of her
complexion, whether it be flawless or tanned by the sun
should not be a determining factor for marriage. She
rejects the Kammerjunker as a husband even though he is
handsome, and instead she marries Carl, whose face has been
badly scarred in the war.

Even more illustrative of Bfirger's de-emphasis on the
importance of beauty is her depiction of Madam Blond, who,
along with the Kammerjunker, constantly gaze at their
reflections in the mirror. Madam Blond and the
Kammerjunker's reflections, however, merely hide the
deplorable people behind them; Bfirger attempts to shatter
this image, and at the same time, criticizes a repressive,
superficial society. Yet another instance of women as
objects of beauty occurs in §EEEUE, when Laura's husband
Ludwig imposes unrealistic standards on his wife by
comparing her to a classical statue. By using his
expectations Laura destroys the confining image of
(perfection he imposes on her.

From her dramas, Elise Bfirger suggests alternative
images for women which represent strength, free will,

independence, and egalitarian thinking rather than the

83
typical female traits of virtue, chastity, dependence and

weakness so often portrayed by her male counterparts.

Elise's Bfirger's works challenge the status quo yet
they still remain within the framework of societal norms.
She represents women as mothers, daughters, and wives
functioning within society. She does not, however, use
these roles as a means to relegate women to the home,
dependent on their husbands and fathers to think for them.
Instead, she projects alternative images for female roles
within social institutions such as marriage. These images
are perhaps not extraordinary to a modern audience but
possibly too defiant for her time. Her defiance, in
combination with her reputation, may have kept her from
reaching the same popularity as Elise von der Recke or
Bettina von Arnim. But the standards and limitations
imposed on her and her works in the eighteenth and
nineteenth centuries should not continue to be imposed in
the twentieth century and beyond.

By shattering weak and dependent images of women,
Bfirger proposes new, equal roles that were not available to
her in her own marriage and profession. She proposes roles
which could serve to break the tradition of an idealized,
expected, and enforced domesticity for those women who would
succeed her. Therefore, it is only by exploring the gaps in
the German literary and social history that one can find the
misconceptions and misrepresentations of female authors.

Furthermore, by reading women's works from a feminist

84
perspective, this exploration can shatter constructed,

prescriptive, domestic images of women often valorized in

the accepted canon.

APPENDICES

 

APPENDIX A

SYNOPSES OP ELISE BURGER'S WORKS

.93 -z ;_ "In vow s x IT ms users A. 1; - _- - r new
(1799) was reprinted three times, translated into Dutch, and
performed in both Altona and Celle. It takes place some
time in the Medieval period. The play opens with the
gardener, Valentin, tending to his flowers. Soon, his
daughter Ida and Marie, the daughter of the deceased
Bfirgermeister von Augspurg, return from picking flowers and
herbs. Ida notices that Marie has been quite lovesick ever
since Georg, the Graf von Hechingen, was wounded and has
since been recovering in her family's castle. Marie admits
that she is in love with Georg but has little hope of
winning his affections since he was once in love with her
sister Adelheit. In spite of herself, Marie cannot help her
feelings and sends the servant Ida to Georg with the basket
of flowers she has picked, which includes one single rose.
She warns Ida not to let Georg know that she loves him as
anything more than a brother because she is not ready to
reveal her true feelings. Through Marie and Ida's
discourse, the audience discovers that Adelheit, the

protagonist, was married off four years earlier to the Graf

85

86
von Teck by her now deceased father. Teck being a 30 hour

journey away, Marie is sad that she has not seen her sister
in such a long time. Similarly, Georg misses Adelheit and
is sitting in adoration of her picture when he receives the
flowers from Marie. He is lamenting that he will never have
the love of his life because she is another man's wife when
he receives the flowers from Marie. When his servant Edgar,
who, incidentally, is in love with Marie's servant Ida,
mentions that flowers from a woman usually mean more than
friendship, Georg declares that Marie is worth a better fate
than to love a man who loves another woman, especially her
sister.

In the next scene, Ida and Marie's mother Elsbet
comfort Marie, as she has just seen the single rose she had
given Georg discarded on the ground. Elsbet explains to
Marie that her husband, the former Bfirgermeister, is to
blame for Georg's moodiness. She tells Marie:

Du bist mein einzig fibrig gebliebenes Kind.
Ist nicht Adelheit, meine Erstgeborene, dem
Starrsinn ihres harten Vaters geopfert . . .
ich sah sie in Todesangst und aus Gehorsam
mit dem bfisartigen Grafen von Teck wegziehen;
ich habe sie verloren und weiB sie
unglficklich . . . (23).
Elsbet also reveals to the audience how her evil, covetous

husband sent Marie to the convent to become a nun, leaving

only her son Hans behind. But one day Elsbet allowed Hans

87
to go fishing outside the protection of the castle walls,

never to be seen again. After her brother's disappearance,
Marie was rescued by her mother from the cloister to live
again happily with her family, but she has become unhappy
ever since the advent of Georg's recuperation there. Marie
reveals to her mother that she loves Georg and Elsbet takes
it upon herself to talk with him since she, too, loves him
and would like him for a son. Just as Elsbet plans to talk
to Georg, the Pater IgnaB arrives with a letter for Georg.
But after hearing Elsbet's plans to discuss marriage
possibilities with Georg, the Pater is elated and decides
the letter can wait.

Elsbet goes to Georg and intercedes for her daughter,
and Georg agrees to the marriage since he knows he will
never have Adelheit. Just as the Pater gives Georg the
letter, Ida and Edgar hurry in to tell Elsbet that a woman
in widow's clothing has arrived and wants to see her. As
the suspense builds, the stranger is revealed as Adelheit.
She recounts that she heard from Georg's trusted friend
.Conrad that he was wounded and in his delirium had often
called her name and was compelled to return home. Adelheit
is reuinited with her mother and wants to see Georg, unaware
of the events which took place only minutes before, the
engagement of Marie and Georg. With this, the first act
comes to an end.

In the second act, the Pater realizes the importance of

the letter he was to deliver to Georg, which explained that

88
Adelheit had been widowed. Georg is distraught at the news,

to which the Pater advises that he return to his homeland
and write each woman a letter making his intentions known.
After realizing the truth, Adelheit, too, is distressed,
stating sorrowfully to her mother:
Meine Madchenjahre trfibte der Anblick Eurer Leiden
und die Harte meines Vaters! Man schleppte mich
zum Altar, man gab mir einen Gemahl, den ich
hafite. Vier Jahre lag ich im Kampf zwischen
Pflicht und Liebe; jetzt nach tausend
ausgestandenen Leiden, nach unzfihlichen
ummervollen Stunden, traumte mich dem Glfick im
SchooBe, eile hieher - und ach! welche Verwirtung
hab ich hier angerichtet! Mein eigener Schmerz,
Georgs Leiden und die arme Marie alles zerreiBt
mir das Herz! . . . (43).
Her mother comforts her just as Adelheit has a vision of her
son Carl in grave danger and she falls to the floor. She
explains that he was unable to accompany her because of the
30 hour journey and she was afraid he would not fare well
and therefore left him with his nurse. Moments later, the
Pater rejoins the women and apologizes to Adelheit for his
unhasty delivery of the letter to Georg. When Adelheit asks
who wrote the letter, the Pater replies that it was the
Kellermeister in Stauffeneck. When Adelheit hears the name,

she explains her experience with the Graf von Stauffeneck:

89
Ja, schon in den ersten Tagen meiner Witwenschaft

schickte Stauffeneck eine Gesandtschaft an mich;
aber ich schlug seine Hand aus. Er sandte vor
einigen Wochen nochmals, und ich benahm ihm alle
Hofnung, weil ich nicht zum Zweitenmale die
Sklavin eines Tyrannen seyn wollte, und weil ich
mir damals das Glfick der Liebe in Georgs Armen so
schfin dachte . . . (53).

In the meantime, Georg writes the sisters each a
letter. He declares his eternal love for Adelheit but tells
her that knightly honor dictates that he must honor his
betrothal and marry Marie. His letter to Marie states that
whatever she decides, he will abide by it and, again,
proposes marriage.

After receiving Georg's letter, Marie decides to return
to the convent because she knows how much Adelheit and Georg
love each other. At the same time, Adelheit decides to give
up hope of ever becoming Georg's wife because she has
already been married, has a son, and does not want to
deprive her sister of her happiness. But just as the
sisters argue about who should be with Georg, Conrad arrives
with another letter from the Kellermeister of Stauffeneck
stating that the Count of Stauffeneck is taking Adelheit's
castle by force and intends to capture her son as a means to
hasten their marriage in order to usurp her land, power, and
autonomy; Adelheit's vision of her son in danger becomes a

reality. After Conrad states that he intends to obtain

90
Georg to join in the fight, Adelheit states that she, too,

is going back to Teck:
Ich bin Mutter und meine Tecker lieben mich. Hart
meinen Plan! IndeB wir den Feind in den Rficken
fallen . . . Mit Georg und Euch will ich fechten;
ihr kennt die Gegend nicht, ich weiB alle Schliche
. . . einen unterirrdischen Gang, alle Zugfinge;
Seh ich bin stark, ich kann ein Schwerdt wohl
ffihren. Mutterliebe wird mich zur Heldin machen
. . . (66).

When the Pater and Adelheit's mother protest her departure,

she retorts:
Still, Pater, still! Schlafert die Lfiwin nich
ein, die ffir ihre Jungen kfimpfen will! . . . Ich
muB ihn befreyen . . . Meine Lfisungs=Wort sei
Mutterliebe! . . . (66-67).

Her departure ends the second act.

In the third act, Adelheit journeys to Teck to reclaim
her land and ensure the safety of her son. On the way, she
meets up with Stauffeneck and his soldier who are holding
Adelheit's brother Hans prisoner. Stauffeneck, seeing her
in a suit of armor, mistakes her for a spy because her size
and voice are not those of a warrior, but Adelheit retorts:
"fibrigens bin ich ein Ritter, ein freyer und ebenbfirtiger
Mann . . ." (87). When Stauffeneck lifts her visor and
discovers her identity, he threatens to kill her brother

right before her eyes unless she agrees to marry him. Just

HIE

Si.

91
as the evil count is about to harm Hans, Conrad and Georg

appear and save them from a gloomy fate. Georg accompanies
his beloved and her brother while Conrad continues to fend
off Stauffeneck, which ends the third act.

The fourth act begins as Elsbet impatiently waits for
news from Teck. Unable to wait any longer, she, Ida, and
Marie also depart for Teck. As they make their way through
the forest, they come upon a hermit, a trusted friend of the
Pater. He takes them in and discovers their identities, and
reveals through an aside that the hermit they were sent to,
Bruder Jakob, is dead. This man, Bruder Michel, leaves the
women to tell Stauffeneck's men about his guests in hopes of
earning a reward, leaving the women to be captured. In
the meantime, the people in charge of Adelheit's castle are
discussing the best plan to keep her son safe from the
recurring attacks of Stauffeneck's soldiers. They discuss
fleeing through the secret, underground passage into the
tower, where they can avoid the attacks. They hear voices
and footsteps and think they will soon meet their fate, but
it is Georg, Adelheit, and Hans instead of Stauffeneck's
men. Adelheit explains to her loyal subjects that they had
worked two days and nights to climb the tower to safety and
block off the passageway to the tower to hinder any enemies.
Adelheit is then reunited with her beloved son and Georg
accepts Carl as his own. Adelheit and Georg discuss
marriage plans, but Adelheit will not marry him until he

swears an oath witnessed by her Tecks that if anything

92
happens to her he will always love and protect Carl as his

own son, which brings act four to a joyful end.

The fifth act begins at sunrise the next morning. The
castle and the forces of Teck have been weakened and Georg
decides to rejoin the fight, leaving Adelheit distressed
because they have just been reunited. After surveying the
damage, the castle guard reports to Adelheit that Georg has
been wounded. She states that she wants to join him and
imagines him dead. Minutes later, news comes that the Georg
is in fact alive. He arrives with Conrad and Edgar, who
report that Stauffeneck's men have been overcome and that
Stauffeneck himself has been taken prisoner. Adelheit
insists that Stauffeneck be pardoned and Georg instructs the
guards to treat him humanely, to which Stauffeneck tells
Georg to go to the devil. After the prisoner is taken away,
Conrad mentions that three other people were found in the
tower and wants to know what to do with them: Elsbet, Ida,
and Marie!

Upon reuniting, Marie realizes that Georg and Adelheit
plan to marry and she declares that she will return to the
convent. Adelheit implores her not to and Conrad interjects
with a marriage proposal. Marie is surprised but states
that she cannot marry a man whom she does not know. She
does agree, however, not to go to the convent and to allow
Conrad to court her, after which he states that he will
gladly wait. Edgar and Ida also declare their marriage

intentions and the entire group gathers around the grand

93
matriarch, Elsbet, as she embraces and blesses them, ending

the play.
SAHILIQ§£_IE§AIBALI§£§B_!EE£§ (1801) in01UGeS the L2§£§21§l
DA§_§QHQQEI and the fisnflsnk 21§_§EIBAZH§LQ§II§EN- They were

performed in 1802 in Mannheim.

B U U 08 (1801) is a two-act play which, like
many of Elise Bfirger's works, has marriage as a central
theme. The protagonist, Amalie, is the only child of the
widowed Obrist von Weng. She is being educated by the
Hefmeieterig, Madam Blond, a vain, pretentious woman who
seeks to rear Amalie according to the norms and expectations
of society. As the play opens, Madam Blond is eating bon
bons and admiring her complexion in the mirror when she
states to the servant Juliette:

Eine feine, weiBe fleckenlose Haut ist das
schfinste was ein Frauenzimmer haben kann, sie
dient sogar ihrer Leiche im Sarg zur zierde,
und wenn ich einst sterbe, so weiB ich gewiB,
daB alles fiber die Blancheur meines Teint
verwundert sein wird . . . (6).
But Juliette finds her comment amusing and replies: "Ach,
Madame! wenn ich erst todt bin, so soll mir das gleich viel
sein, und wenn ich so schwarz wie ein Mohr aussehe! . . ."
(6). After this encounter, Madam Blond asks Juliette about

the whereabouts of Amalie, who has been gathering wild

94
flowers in the fields, winding them into wreaths, stashing

lavender "zwischen die wasche." Upon her return, Amalie is
scolded by Madam Blond who renders her activities frivolous.
Madam Blond states that Amalie's wind-blown hair can be
fixed but her complexion will be ruined if she continues her
absurd behavior. But Amalie ignores the criticism and
declares that nature and freedom are more important to her
than an impressive complexion:
Amalie: 0 so las mir doch die unschuldige Freude!
Die Blumen waren von je her meine Lieblinge,
und es ist so ein liebes natfirliches
Vergnfigen, was der liebe Gott uns giebt! -
GewiB Bonnchen! wenn ich heirathe und Mutter
werde, so will ich mich zwischen meine Kinder
setzen und Blumen pflficken und Kranze mit
ihnen winden.
Juliette (Spfittisch): Aber der Teint, liebes
Fraulein! der Teint wird bei dieser schfinen
Mutterbeschfiftigung gewaltig leiden!
Amalie: Wenn mein Mann mich liebt, wird es ihm
einerlei sein, ob ich ein bchhen schwarzer
bin oder nicht . . . (8).

After Amalie ignores the criticism, Juliette and Madam
Blond inform her that the Kammerjunker, a high-society
acquaintance of Madam Blond, is vying for her hand in
marriage. Amalie has heard that he is a good dancer and

wants her father to give a ball. Her father is reluctant to

95
but finally yields to his beloved daughter. At the same

time, he tells her that the Kammerjunker has a rival for her
hand, the Rittmeister, and Amalie is overjoyed with the
prospect of evaluating the men's dancing abilities. Her
father abhors the idea but allows her to carry on in spite
of himself.

The two opposing suitors, however, have less than
admirable intentions for marrying Amalie which the audience
discovers via asides spoken by each of them. The conceited,
shallow, and self-serving Kammerjunker conveys that he has
many debts, which his marriage to Amalie will eliminate. He
also plans to "retire" Amalie's father from his duties: "Eh
bieu! Wenn die Tochter erst mein ist, so soll der Vater
schon nach meiner Pfeife tanzen . . ." (42). The
Rittmeister reveals, now that the war is over, that he
merely wants to get married. The fact that Amalie is
beautiful and has money and good breeding makes her a good
candidate, although he is not particularly attracted to her.

After acquainting herself with both suitors, Amalie
confesses that neither pleases her. The Kammerjunker may
dance well but his incessant self-adoration and fixing his
powdered hair, which incidentally has blown powder all over
his back, and his mixing of German and French apparently do
not impress her. His concern with how his appearance
compares to his rival's is relieved by Madam Blond assuring
him that the Rittmeister is much older and uglier than he.

Amalie's father has little tolerance for the Kammerjunker

96
and refers to him as both a "Zuckerpuppe" and a

"Zuckerstolle" and demands that he speak German. He asks
the Kammerjunker how many pounds of musk he is wearing (just
as the Rittmeister opens the window to escape the
overpowering scent) and he replies: "Huile de Rose und
ungefahr 20 Tropfen mille fleurs . . ." (36). Amalie,
however, emphatically states that she prefers the scent of
fresh flowers.

The other suitor, the Rittmeister, is not quite as
obnoxious as his rival, however he is much older and more
unrefined. He treats Amalie like a child and speaks to her
father about her as if she were not present and she finds
his absence of manners and patriarchal attitude displeasing.
For example, when the Kammerjunker writes her a note, the
Rittmeister demands to know the contents. He argues that in
all fairness, since they are rivals, he has a right to see
it. Amalie replies that even her own father did not demand
to see the note and she has no obligation to show it to him.
Her father agrees that what is addressed to his daughter is
her business and that neither he nor the Rittmeister has the
right to demand it. At this point, the Rittmeister comments
to Amalie's father that: "Das Madchen scheint sehr naseweis
. . ." (34). But "naseweis" in this instance is not a,
character flaw for the independent Amalie. Instead, as a
result of her "Weisheit" and quick wit, she devises a
competition to determine the man whom she will marry. Her

father, an "enlightened" man, has given his daughter the

97
freedom to marry whomever she chooses, even if he finds her

choice distasteful. The terms of Amalie's competition are

as follows:
Ich liebe die Blumen. Wer von Ihnen beiden mir
morgen frfih das meinen Lieblingsideen angessenste
Bouquet bringt, erhalt meine Hand; - gefallt mir
keines, so bitte ich um Ihre beiderfertige
Freundschaft!...Die Natur hat Viele schfine Blume;
es wird Ihnen also nicht schwer werden, mich damit
zu beschenken . . . (38).

The two suitors scramble to assemble their bouquets,
but, again, their means of attaining the bouquets reveal
their true nature, which Amalie easily detects. The
Kammerjunker's bouquet is actually meant for another
countess who will be attending the ball, but by deceiving a
servant girl, the Kammerjunker's servant steals it away from
her so the Kammerjunker can to give it to Amalie. The
Kammerjunker finds his servant's actions commendable and
states: "Ein Folkbouquet nach der Natur! Dieser Gedanke
ist einzig! . . ." (44). Similarly, the Rittmeister's
methods are unacceptable. He states: "(Bei Seite): Jetzt
freut mich mein Treibhaus zum erstenmal . . ." (39). He
orders all the roses, carnations, hyacinths, and myrtle in
his greenhouse to be used for the bouquet and dictates that
they be bound with a huge red sash and bow. When asked how
much material to buy, the Rittmeister replies no less than

twelve to sixteen yards.

98
The next scene builds suspense and provides comic

relief, as it reveals Madam Blond's true nature as well.
Again, she vainly sits before a mirror admiring her
complexion and boasts that, unfortunately, Amalie is not
blessed with the coquettishness that she possesses. But she
also notices that she looks a bit pale and decides to use
some rouge on her cheeks. Just then, the servant Jeremis
unexpectedly brings her breakfast and comments on how nicely
she is painting herself, to which she indignantly replies
that she was brushing her teeth. When Jeremis asks if her
teeth are on her cheek, she slaps him and the commotion
attracts the attention of Amalie and her father. When asked
for an explanation, Madam Blond replies that Jeremis was
trying to kiss her and she was forced to defend herself.
Madam Blond escapes the interrogation and retires to her
room and the Obrist demands an explanation from Jeremis.
After learning the truth from the servant and examining
Madam Blond's unnaturally reddened cheek, the Obrist orders
her out of his house. But Amalie feels sorry for the old
woman and implores her father not to be angry with Madam
Blond because aside from her vanity, she is truly a good
person.

The interlude, however, is interrupted when Amalie
notices that the Rittmeister's bouquet has arrived and the
final, suspenseful scene begins. The Rittmeister's huge

bouquet takes her by surprise and she asks:

99
Amalie: ...Wozu haben Sie einen solchen Aufwand

von Band gemacht?
Juliette: Um Sie zu binden, gnadiges Fraulein.
Amalie: Ungebundene Blumen sind die schfinsten
. . . (54).
Then, the Kammerjunker appears and presents his colorful,
yet unnatural, bouquet. Amalie thanks him but announces
that neither bouquet suits her and gives the following
reasons:
Das Ihrige Herr Rittmeister hat einen so grofien
Umfang, daB es scheint, mit Gewalt die Bewunderung
durch Ueberhaufung erregen zu wollen; was man
einzelnen Blumen nicht versagen kfinnte, die
wohlgewahlt zum Herzen sprachen, verliert beim
Blick auf die Menge! . . . und Ihr Bouquet, Herr
Kammerjunker, so einzig es in seiner Art, und so
schfin die Arbeit ist -stellt das Bild der
Ueppigkeit und der Unnatur so lebhaft dar, - das
nur ein vom Glanze schimmernder Stadte geblendetes
Auge, nicht aber ein einfaches, auf dem Lande,
mitten in der Schfinheiten der Natur, gebildetes
Herz, Geschmack daran finden kann! . . . (56-57).
Amalie offers the suitors her friendship and tells her
father that she knows another man will come and bring
flowers, and her will be the one whom she marries. This
prediction foreshadows the coming event, as Amalie remembers

a dream she had, but never had a chance to reveal to Madam

100

Blond or Juliette. Another man does in fact appear,

Amalie's distant cousin Carl, who has been away fighting in

the war.

youthful

He approaches Amalie and reminds her of their

folly:

Carl: Erinnern Sie sich noch Cousinchen! wie wir
vor sechs Jahren, wenn wir auf die Wiese
spielten, Blumen pflfickten! - Ich ritt daran
vorbei - und eingedenk jener seligen
Kinderzeit pflfickte ich ie einfachen
Blfimchen ffir Sie.

Amalie: Meine Lieblingsblumen! Ich habe dich
nicht vergessen! - Je linger je lieber -
werden wir uns haben! - und die
Schlfisselblumen gebe ich Ihnen halb zurfick
und mit denselben den Schlfissel zu meinem
Herzen, wenn Sie ihn anders haben wollen!

. . . vaterchen, das ist das rechte Bouquet!

. . . (59-60).

The play closes with Amalie's father bestowing his blessing

on the forthcoming union:

Komm her, Herzenskind! und Du auch Hauptmann Carl!
So, nun lasse mich Gott in Freude erleben, bis ins
achzigste Jahr so zwischen Euch zu sitzen; denn
drfickst Du, Carl, dem alten Vater die Augen zu, Du
Amalie, bestreust seine Leiche mit Blumen, und

Gott sagt: Punctum . . . (62).

101
DIB_IIIBAI!§L!§IIQE!1_!AQ!§2I§L is the second part Of Elise

Bfirger's fififl:§1§§§_fl§3§£. The main character is a wealthy
Englishman, Lord Henry Sieber (Sieb=riddle), who has
inherited 80,000 gulden. He places an ad in the newspaper
soliciting "older" people to apply who want to marry and
begin their lives anew in the West Indies. However, there
is one condition, they must give up their right to choose
their spouse and let fate decide whom they marry. Lord
Sieber mentions that it may be nobler to build an orphanage
or a hospital instead of whimsically wasting his money on an
adventure, but he explains that the French blood on his
mother's side will not allow him to do what his stuffy, sour
English compatriots would do.

As the play opens, Lord Sieber's servant Wilhelm
prepares a room in the golenen Schwann, an inn in Amsterdam,
with a table, two vases, small pieces of paper, a pen,-
fourteen chairs, and fourteen rings, as Sieber dresses
himself in a costume. Sieber interviews each candidate
individually, obtains a brief life's history, and reiterates
that they must swear an oath giving up their right to choose
a spouse. The majority of the Heirathslustigen, he finds,
are not interested in marriage at all, but instead, for
various reasons, have their sights on the money.

The interviews reveal that the candidates come from
different social groups and hold vastly different
occupations. The first man is Peter Veit, a 42 year-old

land leaser whose bride died many years earlier and has

102
since become a drunk. The second man, Baron von Zierlich,

is an eccentric 56 year-old bachelor whose possessions were
so rare and beautiful, he did not want a wife, servant, or
cook meddling among his things. His eccentricity led him to
lower goods and food in and out of a window in order that no
grain of sand manifest itself in his exquisite carpets or
mar his polished marble floors, but he became lonely and
decided to join the group. The next candidate, Magister
BeiBan, Cadidatus Philosophiae, is a disillusioned native
German who feels that the citizens of his fatherland are
resisting change:
Das sind die Menschen von viel zu grobem Stoff;
sie hassen die Aufklarung, und sind so altmodisch,
daB sie keineswegs die Ehre haben, mir zu
gefallen; . . . dort (in West Indien) werde ich
Gelegenheit haben, die Theorie meiner Philosophie
durch Praxis zu erhfihen . . . (84).
The fourth man, Monsier Poltron, is an unemployed fencing
master who wants to go to the New World to practice his art
"unter einem anderen Himmelsreiche” (88). The next
candidate is characterized as a Schwa e , Herr Mondschein.
He describes himself as a "love child" and was raised by a
painter and the painter's landlady. He was once in love but
his feelings were not returned. She threw away his letters
and poetry and rewarded his affections by emptying a glass
of water on his head. As a final gesture, she also sent him

a rusty, old pistol to rid herself of him, perhaps playing

103
on the final few scenes in Goethe's flerther. But alas, the

poor man was never able to forget her, but was also unable
to support himself. The sixth candidate, the barber Niklaus
Rebensaft, describes himself as not only a barber, but a
barber like the famous Barber of Seville, in that he not
only cuts hair, lets blood, and shaves faces, he also is a
matchmaker, albeit an unpaid, starving matchmaker. The
final candidate is the French tailor Francois san Chagrin
who describes himself as the best tailor in Europe. His
dilemma, however, is that after the revolution, he was not
able to earn a living. He came to Holland to start a new
life but the fashions are so antiquated that, again, he
cannot earn enough to support himself:
. . . darum will ik gehn nak die Indes, bring dort
neue facon und vergefi das undankbare Europe, wo is
niks mehr zu mack, seit die Leut nur sprek von
Egalité uns tragen Dimanche und ander Tag einerlei
Kleit! . . . (97).
Each character Bfirger presents speaks in a style of language
suited to his or her social position and background. The
first man, the drunk, speaks simply, while the philosopher
speaks academically and snobbishly, and Herr Mondschein
speaks poetically and hyperbolically. Bfirger's awareness of
the society in which she lived makes this play enjoyable and
amusing, but the way in which she criticizes social norms

and attitudes is noticeable.

104
The second half of the group is made up of seven women,

the first being Susanna Geldlieb, a 40 year-old chambermaid,
whom the lord addresses quite informally: "wie alt bist Du
denn, mein Schatzchen?" . . . (100). Her unhappy situation
is caused by what today would be described as ageism. Ten
years earlier she had been called "schfine SuBchen" but as
she aged she was called "alte Drache" or "alte Deugna." She
could not stay on as a "Kammerjunfer" because she was too
old but too pure to be called a "Kammerfrau": "weil ich
noch ein ehrliches Madchen bin . . ." (100). She was so
upset that she decided to answer the ad, get married, and
leave the country. The second woman, Frau von Lieblich, is
a 45 year-old pious woman who was married to a good-for-
nothing. After his death, she became devout in her faith
and regarded the newspaper ad as a chance to convert Indians
in the New World. Susanna, the chambermaid, however,
recognizes her as her former employer and denounces her as a
phony, lying gossip who put a Eergieremirrel in the
Justizrfithin's coffee at a ball to keep her from winning the
title of best dancer. Frau von Liebling defends herself by
stating that she has reformed and was told by God in a dream
to answer the ad. Lord Sieber simply points out that: "Im
IHimmelreich sind wir so alle gleich . . ." (106). The third
‘woman is Frau Grimmig, the widowed proprietor of the
"goldnen Schwann," whose step-son's next birthday will make
Ihim old enough to assume the family business. Since she

‘will be put out of a job, she decides to join the others in

105
hopes of establishing her own business in the West Indies.

The next woman, Madam Ricobert, is a governess who has been
forced out of a job because of the changing social
structure:
Damen vom Stande werden nun so gemein, daB sie
ihre Kinder selbst erziehen, wie die Bfirgerfrauen,
uns es ist nicht mfiglich, mehr zu finden eine gute
Condition . . . alle vornehme Kinder laBt man
jetzt laufen wie die Gemeinen; abgeschnittenes
Haar, kurze Recke, bloBen Hals, nackte Arme! . . .
Ach! da ist mir alle Lust vergangen, ferner
Gouvernante zu sein! - Lieber will ich von einem
Mann geouvernirien lassen! . . . (110).
She regards social change more confining than marriage and
decides to give up her self-sufficient lifestyle to be
governed by a man. The fifth woman is Mademoiselle
Springinsfeld, a once-accomplished ballerina whose life was
ruined by love. She married a tight-rope dancer and was
forced to join his father's troupe in order to make a
living. After eighteen years and much misfortune, her
husband died and the troupe disbanded. She found herself
‘unemployed and because of the undignified way she had made a
living, was unable to perform on any stage again. Thus, she
(decides to find refuge in a new country. The sixth woman,
Signora Zechini, the once-famous Italian opera singer,
<:onfesses that although her career was quite successful, she

laad trouble managing her money: "ik bin nit gewohnt geweB,

106
zu managir die Geld, ist mir nix geblieb fibrig . . ." (116).

She met with misfortune on the German stage and as a result
she states: ". . . ik bin geweBt prostituir . . ." (116).
Rather than perform in Germany again, she decides to marry,
go to the West Indies, and enjoy peaceful anonymity. The
final woman in the group is Mademoiselle Joli, who deals in
wigs, jewelry, and other trinkets. She regards men as one
of the most vile creatures on earth because out of the 365
love affairs she has had since she turned fifteen, not one
blossomed into marriage. She inherited her father's
business and was successful for thirty years until no one
would buy her outdated styles any longer. She decides to
take her wares to the West Indies in hopes of selling them
there. Her decision to leave the country was finalized when
the French tailor with whom she was involved disappeared,
when she discovers that the Frenchman is none other than
Monsieur Francois! The two have a joyful reunion but
sorrowfully realize that he has already sworn an oath to let
fate decide his marriage partner; she does the same in hopes
that Madam Fortuna look kindly upon them, allowing them to
be together.

Just as all the candidates have been interviewed and
have sworn their oaths, a 20 year-old woman, Jungfer
Frfihlich, appears, wanting to join the group. Lord Sieber
is immediately taken with her and listens to her story. Her
widowed father, an officer in the army, died two years

earlier from wounds inflicted during the revolution. She

107
and her servant woman worked to sustain themselves but the

servant died as well. After seeing the ad in the newspaper,
she decided to ask the man organizing the excursion to allow
her to accompany the group. After hearing her story, the
lord examines her personal papers and discovers that her
mother was his French grandmother's sister. He then
proposes marriage and she happily accepts, but admits:
Werden Sie mir wohl verzeihen, wenn ich Ihnen als
Vetter offen erwiedere, daB, wenn ich mir jemals
das Bild eines kfinftigen Gatten dachte, so war es
dem Ihrigen sehr unfihnlich . . . (126).
Lord Sieber forgets that he is wearing a costume and removes
it so his bride can see him.

What begins as an adventurous game of chance leads to
the lord's participation. The play closes with the
"Heirathslustigen" dancing and singing around the theater:

Sind wir in Amerika,

Wollen frei wir leben,

mit den lieben Sacken da

uns den Wohlstand geben;

jeder nimt sein Weib in Arm,
Geld und Liebchen winken;

frei von Sorgen, frei von Harm

Wollen wir dort trinken! . . . (129).

D1: " m2 6 mm. (1801) is a

IPlay written in honor of Queen Charlotte of Hannover, where

108
it takes place. The old, widowed nurse of the noble family,

Frau Marthe, has four daughters Lieschen, Hannchen,
Gretchen, and Trinchen. Other than their house and potato
field, they are all but destitute. The play opens with the
four girls dressed in Sunday clothes working at their
spinning wheels. They are dressed up in honor of queen
Charlotte's birthday, a festival for the mother of their
land. After the girls are done spinning they go their
separate ways, just as a stranger appears at the door to
talk to Frau Marthe. He assures her that they know each
other but she cannot remember him. He makes a peculiar
proposition that if her four daughters marry on this day, he
will give each couple 1,000 rhei_r. Marthe naively regards
the situation inconceivable because her daughters have no
suitors, but the stranger quickly proves her wrong. Marthe
and the stranger witness a scene between Lieschen and her
beau Tfiffel, in which the couple discusses how to approach
Marthe about their marriage intentions:

T6ffel: Sieh nur an, Lieschen, deine Mutter kann
ja gar nichts an mir aussetzen, als dafl ich
nicht reich bin. Denn ein ehrlicher
Schaferknecht bin ich all mein Lebstage
gewesen, und arbeiten kann ich noch nebenbei,
also -

Lieschen: Ach was also! - ich habe auch zwei

Hande und bin jung und stark . . . (9).

109
After they leave, Hannchen and her beau Gfirge appear and

discuss when they should ask permission to marry. The
situation is too unbelievable for Marthe and she interrupts
the surprised couple. She and the stranger explain the
proposition to them and Marthe agrees that perhaps it is
appropriate for the two older couples to marry but she
argues that her two younger daughters do not even have
prospects. But Trinchen reveals that she is in love with
the boy next door and Gretchen, who is a year older, also
has wedding plans. After learning of her daughters'
suitors, Marthe agrees to accept the stranger's generosity,
especially since it is the queen's birthday and the the
wedding anniversary of her Miicgtoehter, Sophie von
Lindheim, and she has no money for the dowries. In the
meantime, Taffel and Lieschen return from a walk and hear of
the stranger's generous offer to which Tfiffel responds:
"Sind all gut die, aber ohne die tausend Thaler warest Du
mir eben so lieb gewesen; Lieschen Du bist meine tausend
Thaler . . ." (21). The stranger tells them when and where
to be for the ceremony, as he will arrange the details.
Sophie von Lindheim, Marthe's Milenreenrer, on the
other hand, is mourning the loss of her husband Carl, who
left for Scotland on business more than six months earlier.
The distressing thought of spending their seventh wedding
anniversary alone is unbearable for Sophie but her mother
assures her that such a good, true wife and mother cannot go

unrewarded by God. But when Sophie and her family arrive at

110
the festival and Sophie sees the four couples preparing to

marry, she prays to God that if Carl is dead that he take
her too. Carl calls out to Sophie and as she hears his
voice, the stranger's identity is revealed, "die
Uberraschung." They embrace as Sophie chides him for his
communicative negligence. Carl apologizes and explains that
his delay was caused by a court battle over an unexpected
inheiritance and a two-month-long illness. He shares his
good fortune with Marthe's daughters in honor of the woman

who nourished and raised his beloved wife.

 

(1814) is written in Alexandrine verse and was first

performed in Nfirnberg with Elise Bfirger playing the leading
role. According to Arthur Richel, a biographer of Bfirger,
the play was often performed in Nfirnberg and Keln.

This one-act play consists of four characters, Ludwig,
his wife Laura, Laura's sister Rosaura, and Ludwig's servant
Ferdinand. It begins as Laura discusses her marital
problems with her sister. She conveys that her husband has
grown cold toward her and that the happiness they
experienced in the first years of marriage has vanished.
Laura reveals that she is suspicious of the locked, yellow
room on the second floor of their house and imagines that
her husband is hiding another woman there. But her sister
assures her that nothing of that nature is taking place:

"Kein Madchen ist bei ihm, nur weise Bilder, Bfisten /

111
Von Gips sind es, die sich in diesem Zimmer brfisten /

Antiken, denen er so Zeit als Liebe weiht . . .” (3).

At first, Laura thinks her sister is joking but Rosaura
insists she is telling the truth. Just then, they hear
Ludwig and his servant Ferdinand coming and they hide in a
closet to eavesdrop.

Ludwig complains to Ferdinand that he has waited all
day in vain for his statue to be delivered. He continues
complaining by comparing his wife to his perfect works of
art, expressing how she lacks artistic qualities and talent,
criticizing her appearance:

Doch ist sie gar nicht schfin, sie hat gemeine
Formen,
Kein hohes EbenmaB, sie paBte zu Herrn
Ormen.
Hatt der sie nur gefreyt, das war wohl noch ein
Paar!
Zwar liebte damals ich ach, schon sind es sechs
Jahr -
An ihr der Tugend Reiz, doch der ist langst
vergangen,
Jetzt ist mein Aug' gewohnt an edleres
Verlangen . . . (8).
‘With this, he pulls a sketch of his ideal "masterpiece" from
his pocket, which is on its way from Florence. After

laearing her husband's criticism, Laura is crushed and rashly

112
decides to leave: ”Kann er hingeben warme Lieb an kalte

Puppen/So zieh zum Onkel ich, er bleibe bei der
Gruppen . . ." (11). But Rosaura persuades her to stay,
besides, she says: "Auch sehe ich zur Scheidung weder
Schuld noch Klage / Man lachte Dich nur aus, sprachst Du von
Deiner Plage . . .” (12). She reminds Laura that his odd
behavior began shortly after seeing a ririeehe_DerereiiDng,
a short performance in which an actor or actress takes on
the qualities of a painting, sculpture, or character in
history or literature. It seems that Ludwig now has a
fixation for classical art and Laura agrees: "Ich glaube,
Du hast Recht/Denn seit dem Unglfickstag, da findt er alles
schlecht/Was nicht antik, und klassisch will er alles haben
. . . (13). But luckily, Laura and Rosaura intercept a
letter which Ferdinand is about to deliver to Ludwig telling
him that his statue was broken into bits on the way from
Florence. Rosaura replies: "Bravo! So gehts den gipsnen
schfinen Damen . . ." (16). Laura agrees and decides to take
agressive action:

Ich will den schwachen, lieben Mann kuriren,

Ich bin ihm gar zu gut, ich kann ihn nicht

verlieren.
Es geht gewiB. Aufs neue gewinne ich sein Herz
Und zwar durch einen zarten, leichten Frauen
Scherz.
Mein Spiegel sagt mir doch, ich sey nicht schlecht

gebaut

113
Nun denn, 0 Laura, einmal nur dir selbst

vertraut! . . . (17-18).

The sisters' plot continues when they go to the locked,
yellow room, Laura dresses herself exactly as the statue in
the sketch is dressed. She climbs onto a pedestal in wait
of her husband. Ludwig enters the room and is overjoyed
when he thinks his perfect masterpiece has arrived. One by
one he admires the statue's (Laura's) physical features, the
very same features he had previously criticized when he
described his wife.

As the statue (Laura) gracefully begins to move, Ludwig
experiences chills and thinks he is seeing ghosts or going
insane. He kneels in homage before his ideal and implores
an answer from her:

Laura: So sieh, was langst Die schon Freund Amor
zugesandt, Dein liebend Weib!
Ludwig: O Himmel!
Laura: Nicht aus fernen Land . . . k6mmt Dir Dein
wahres Glfick, es war schon langst Dir nah,
Nur daB es nicht Dein fernhin schwarmend Auge
sah.
Du suchtest weit, was taglich langst schon
Dich umgeben
Und nach getraumter Reiz gieng nur Dein
geistig streben . . . (26).
.As if waking from a trance, Ludwig comes to his senses and

pledges his love to Laura and promises to give up his

114
obsession. Rosaura, who has been hiding in the closet,

comes out, climbs onto the pedestal, and holds a wreath of
myrtle and roses over the couple and declares: "Ich kranze

sie, die ist antik, modern und ewig schfin . . ." (28).

APPENDIX E

ornzn wears a! ELISE nfinosn

Bfirger, Elise. de ' r5 ' v ‘ te sch
in ffigf Aufzfigeg. Jena: Voigt, 1812.
---. c e'n und Wah e't. ' ia o 's e ch' .

Hannover: n. p., 1799.
---. an e s w 'b 'che e ' a .

Hamburg und Altona: n. p., 1799.

---. ’ 'c ' s t
Seneespiei; Die Heiratheigerigen, Nechepiei.
Lemgo: Meier, 1801.

---. Die Uberraschung, Farilieggemelge ie einer ecte.
Hannover: Pockwitz, 1801.

---. DeDer meinen Aurenrheir in Haegoyer gegen gen
engennanteg Verfasser der §chicksaie einer

eat ische en eurer' . Altona: n. p.,
1801.

---. Mein TaschegDuch. Deg Freundiichen meines Geschieenre
gegeihr. Bd. 1, 2. Dresden und Pirna: n. p.,

1804, 1807.

'---. Die scDfige Dfissenge oder Veronike aus gen Karpathen.
Bremen: Mfiller, 1807.

115

116
Ged te s erste B nd ihre Ge 'chte

geiseblatter, Kunst- und Lebensansichteg.
Hamburg: Mfiller, 1812.

Lieder am BDein. 1813.
at er vo heodora. 'e schw' 'sche Baue
in §achsen. Offenbach: n. p., 1823.

Lilienbiatter und Zyeressenzweige von Theodora.
Frankfurt am Main: n. p., 1826.

Klara von Montalban. Drama in ffinf Akten.
Handschriften befinden sich in der Mannheimer
Theaterbibliothek und in der Wiener
Staatsbibliothek.

Die Freunde zu Syrakus. Schauspiel in Jamben und ffinf
Akten. In: getreechen Morgegrletr (172-173):

1816.

I'- .2 T - . u: .-~ -.-. ,- -e'- ' Eigeu
Arr. Frankfurt am Main: n. p., 1815.

Die Wfirfelbraut. Lustspiel in ffinf Akten. Aufgeffihrt

dreimal in Kassel, 1829.

APPENDIX C

DAB cznrcnr "an nan orcnmsn nfinozn"

O Bfirger, Bfirger, edler Mann,

Der Lieder singt, wie keiner kann,
Von Rhein an bis zum Belt,
Vergebens berg' ich das Geffihl,
Das mir bei deinem Harfenspiel

Den Busen schwellt!

Mein Auge sah von dir sonst nichts,
Als nur die Abschrift des Gesichts,
Und dennoch - lieb' ich dich!

Denn deine Seele, fromm und gut,
Und deiner Lieder Kraft und Muth

Entzfikten mich.

So ffillt' im ganzen Musenhain

Von allen Sangern, groB und klein,
Noch keiner mir die Brust.

Sie wogt' empor wie Fluth der See;
Es kampften stfirmend Lust und Weh,

Und Weh und Lust.

117

118
An Wonnen, wie an Thrfinen reich,

Rief ich, wie oft: O herzen gleich
Und kfissen mechte ich dich! -
So wechselte, wie dein Gesang,
In mir der Hochgeffihle Drang,

Dem alles wich.

O Bfirger, Bfirger, sfiBer Mann,

Der Ohr und Herz bezaubern kann

Mit Schmeichel=Wort und Sinn,

Mein Loblied ehrt dich freilich nicht:
Doch here, was mein Herz dir spricht,

Und wer ich bin!

In Schwaben blfiht am Neckarstrand
Ein schfines segenreiches Land,
Das mich an's Licht gebar;

Ein Land, worin seit grauer Zeit
Die alte Deutsche Redlichkeit

Zu Hause war.

Da wuchs ich wohlbehalten auf,
Und meines reinen Lebens Lauf

MaB zwanzig Mahl das Jahr.

Zum Grabe sank mein Vater frfih -
Kaum lieB mir noch der Himmel die,

Die mich gebar.

119
Schon wankend an des Grabes Rand,

Ergriff sie des Erbarmers Hand,
Und gab sie mir zurfik.

Sie bildete mit weiser Mfih',
Was Gutes mir Natur verlieh,

Zu meinem Glfick.

Bei heiterm Geist, bei frohem Muth
Ward mir ein Herz, das fromm und gut
Vor Gott zu seyn begehrt.

Nur edler Liebe huldigt's frei,

Und was es liebt, das liebt es treu

Und halt es werth.

Mein Lieb, - er zeigt vielleicht dem Blik
Kein Stfimper= und kein Meisterstfik

Der bildenden Natur.

Ich bin nicht arm, und bin nicht reich;
Mein Stand halt, meinen Gfitern gleich,

Die Mittelspur.

Die bin ich, die! Und - liebe dich!
Im schfinen Stuttgardt findst du mich,
Du trauter Witwersmann!

Umschlange wohl nach langem Harm

Ein liebevolles Weib dein Arm,

So komm heran!

120
Dann traten tausend Freier her,

Und beten Sfikke Goldes schwer,

Und du begehrtest mein:

Dir weigert' ich nicht Herz noch Hand;
Selbst um mein liebes Vaterland

Tauscht' ich dich ein.

Steht Schwaben=Lieb' und Treu' dir an,
So komm, Geliebter, komm heran,

Und wirb - o wirb um mich! -

Nimm oder nimm mich nicht, so ist

Und bleibt mein Lied zu jeder Frist:

Dich lieb' ich, dich!

BIBLIOGRAPHY

 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

PRIMARY LITERATURE
Bfirger, Elise. ec ersc
in_fnnf_Aufzfisen- Jena: Voiqt. 1812-

---. Die_antike_Statue_aus_El9reazl__§sherzspiel_ia_eineu
55;. Frankfurt am Main: Schaefer, 1929.

§2haus2ielLIQis_neirathslnstigenl_nash§eiel- Lemgo:
Meier, 1801.

e seb t e - eb s s'c ten.

Hamburg: Mfiller, 1812.

---- neher_meinen_Anfenthalt_in_nannexer_sesen_den
s d c s e e
's e e e ' . Altona: n. p., 1801.
--_. 'e s ' ‘ ° ' e e.

Hannover: Pockwitz, 1801.

121

122
SECONDARY LITERATURE

SOCIO-HISTORICAL SOURCES
Arnold, Heinz Ludwig and Volker Sinemus, e de
Literatur- eng Snrachwissenschaft Mfinchen:
Taschenbuch, 1973.
Becker-Cantarino, Barbara. e a We u fi i ' .
Stuttgart: Metzler, 1987.
Beutin, Wolfgang and Klaus Ehlert, u.a. Denneche

u e e v n b' Ge .

 

Stuttgart: Metzler, 1989.

Brinker-Gabler, Gisela. Fraue ° v m
Eittelalter_his_zhm_Bnee_des_1§l_lahrhunderts-

Mfinchen: Beck, 1988.
Bruns, Berhnhard. un W' e ' 'm F

EneDrnen. Mfinchen: Schoningh, 1976.
Chester, Robert, Ed. Digeree_in_£nrene. Belgium:

Netherlands Interuniversity Demographic Institute,

1977.
Erler, Adalbert and Ekkehard Kaufmann, Eds. Henggerrernneh
zur_dsuteshen.Beshtsge§2hi§hte. Berlin: Schmidt.

1967.
Fout, John C., Ed. gernen Women in rne Ninereenrh Century,
So s o . New York: Holmes, 1984.
Frevert, Ute. ' 's r eo s
anc o o . Oxford: St.

Martin's, 1989.

123
Gallas, Helga and Magdelene Heuser, Eds. nte chu

genan ven Ereuen nn 180 . Tfibingen: Niemeyer, 1990.
Goethe, Johann Wolfgang von. §5mtiiche Werke nach Enochen

e s ' e u . Eckermann, Ed.
Mfinchen: Hanser, 1985.
Goodman, Katherine. Dislclosures. Women's Autobiography in

e an e ee 790 a d . New York: Lang, 1986.

Greiner, Martin. Die Enrstehung der modernen

terha t e d' v o s

 

ig, Jahrhunderrs. Hamburg: Rowohlt, 1964.
Grimminger, Rolf, Ed. Hansere §e§ie1ge§enicnte ger
deutscnen Literetur vom i6. Jahrhunderr Dis zur

gegenyerr. 3. Bd. Mfinchen: Hanser, 1980.

Hanser. Arnold. WWW.
Bd. 2. Mfinchen: Beck, 1953.

Hoche, Johann Gottfried. Ver 'e e. Hannover, 1794.

Hoff, Dagmar von. Dramen des WeiDlienen. Denrsche

Dramarikerinnen nn iggg. Opladen: Westdeutscher,
1989.

Joeres Ruth-Ellen, B. and Mary Jo Maynes, Eds. Derman Women

,1 17 Eio t“1t - 0 N. ' eegt .‘1 e- 3 O 1-.
't to . Bloomington: Indiana U P, 1986.
Jurgensen, Manfred, Ed. ue ' e . o ' e

new. Bern: Lang. 1983.
Krauss, Werner and Walter Dietze, Eds. Nene_neirr§ge_znr

WW Berlin: Rfitten. 1964-

124
Lichterberger, J.P. Divorce: A Social interpretation. New

York: Whittlesey, 1931.

Meise, Helga. u c t e sche
Ereuenronene im ig, genrhundert. Berlin: Guttandin,
1983.

Novak, Sigrid Scholtz. "The Invisible Woman: The Case of

the Female Playwright in German Literature." genrnei
9f Soeiai Issues 28 (1972): 47-57.
Paulsen, Wolfgang, Ed. 'e s ' to ' .

Bern: Francke, 1979.

Phillips, Roderick. Putring Asunder; A Hierory of Divorce
in_fleerern_§eeiery. Cambridge: Cambridge U P, 1988.

Ritchie. Gisela 1“. W
W- Bonn:

Bouvier, 1989.

Schiller, Friedrich von. fienriien_flerke. Gerhard Fricke,
Ed. Mfinchen: Beck, 1959.

Weigel, Sigrid. Die Stimme der Medusa. Senreibweisen in
W - Diilmen-Hiddingse1=

Tende, 1987.

Westermarek. Edward. W vols.
2, 3. London: Macmillan, 1921.

Wilson, Katharina M. flenen Writere of rne Beneissence and
Befornatign. Athens: U of Georgia P, 1987.

Woolsey, Theodore D. on 'vo c n 'v c

Legieierien. New York: Scribner, 1869.

 

125
Wurst, Karin A., Ed. Ereuen nnd Drama im acnrzehnten

Denrnnnger_. Kfiln: Bfihlau, 1991.

PEMINIST/LITERARY THEORY
Bab, Julius. Die Frau aie genauspieierin. Berlin:
Oesterheld, 1915.
Becker-Cantarino, Barbara. De an e We fi di ' .

Stuttgart: Metzler, 1987.

Blackwell, Jeanine and Susanne Zantop, Eds. itter He :
Gernan flonen Wrirere fren 1700 to i§3 . Lincoln: U of

Nebraska, 1990.
---. "Anonym, verschollen, trivial: Methodological

Hindrances in Researching German Women's Literature."

Esmen_in_Gernaa_Yearheek 1 (1985): 39-59-
Butler, Judith. gender Troubie: Feninism eng rne

Shhxersien_9f_1dentitx- New York: Routledge. 1990.
De Beauvoir, Simone. Ine_§eegng_§er. New York: Knopf,

1971.

Eagleton, Terry. Literary Theory. Minneapolis: U of

Minnesota, 1983.
Frederiksen, Elke, Ed. Wemen Writers of Germany, Ausrria,
ene_§yirzer1ene. New York: Greenwood, 1989.

Gerhard, C. "Bfirgers dritte Gattin." Digaskeiia 306 (1897):

1223.
Gilbert, Sandra M. and Susan Gubar, Eds. M ma
t tt' : e W a Writ r and e N' teenth Centur

Lirerery_Ineginerign. New Haven: Yale U P, 1979.

 

 

126
Gilligan, Carol. ' en V c s o i

an W men's e 0 me . Cambridge: Harvard U

P, 1982.
Goldschmidt, Rudolf K. Die Schauspielerin, Ihr Weg, inre
WWW- Stuttgart: Hadecke. 1922 -

Goodman, Katherine R. and Edith Waldstein, Eds. In rne
dow f 0 5° e a W me W e s und .

Albany: SUNY, 1992.

Greene, Gayle and Coppelia Kahn, Eds. Making e Differenee;
Eeminist Literary gririeisn. London: Routledge, 1985.
Mentzel, Elizabeth. Ge 'cht er s ' un t n
F ank urt am Ma on b's u E 6 n
5 st t' e omfidie uses B t u
utsche ultu - un a es te. Frankfurt am

Main: Vfilcker, 1882.

---. te r u t 5
V0 5 'c t ' e A b' u s
fieneusnielnaneee une 2D Bertraire. Frankfurt am Main:
Rfitten, 1902.

Millett, Kate. Sergei Eolitics. New York: Ballantine,
1969.

Moers, Ellen. Literary Women. New York: Oxford U P, 1963.

Moi, Toril. gerneilTertnal goiitics: reminist Literery
Ineery. London: Methuen, 1985.

Schowalter, Elaine, Ed. N w Fe ' i t C ' c s . New

York: Pantheon, 1985.

 

 

127

---. ' tu e . Princeton: Princeton U P,
1977.
Schulte-Sasse, Jochen. Die Kritik an der
'v a 'te se' de u 13 . tudien zu
s h' d 'ts ' . Mfinchen:

Kink, 1971.

Stfimcke, Heinrich. Die Bren eis Scheuspieierin. Leipzig:
Rothbarth, 1905.

Woolfe, Virginia. A_BQQE_Q£_QD§L§_Q!D- San Diego:
Harcourt, 1929.

BIOGRAPHICAL SOURCES
Althof, Ludwig Christoph. "Einige Nachrichten von dem
vornehmsten Lebensumstanden G. A. Bfirgers nebst einem

Beitrag zur Charakteristik desselben." In: gerrrriee

Angner_DQrger§_§§nriiene_flerke. Berlin: Weichert,
1905.

Brfimmer, Franz. ts Dic r- e ' o 'o a hisc
un ' a ' ch 'tt e' un b eutsc e
Dichter aller Zeiren. Bd. 1. Stuttgart: Krfill,
1876.

Bfirger, Gottfried August. Sfinriiche Werke. Berlin:
Willdorff, 1905.
Dering, Heinrich. G. fi e e en. Berlin: n. p.,

1826.

128
Duboc, Julius. ”Bfirgers Charakter in seinem Liebesleben."

Eene_E2natshefte_fQr_Dishtkunst_und_Kritik 3 (1876):
145-60.

Ebeling, Friedrich Wilhelm. gr_Ar_Dflrger_nne_fiiiee_flennr_
Eine Ehe- Kunet- ung Direrernrieben. Leipzig: n. p.,
1871.

Ebstein, Erich. "Neues fiber G. A. Bfirgers Schwabenmfidchen
Elise Hahn. Acht Briefe an den Grafen Soden." Denneene
Thaiia 1 (1902): 42-64.

---. "Uber die Konfiskation von Bfirgers Ehestands-
geschichte." zeitsshrift_f§r_hfisherfreunde 22 (1930).

Eisenberg, Ludwig. o ' 8 xi on de
deuts2hen_Bnhne_im_XIxi_1ahrhundert- Leipzig: n- p.,
1903.
Ehrmann. Theophil. Ed- hri_fe_22a_Gettfrieg_hssust_hflrger
aa_Earianne_EhrmannI__Eia_marksflrdiser_neitrag_zhr
es e te e 5 es te s.

Weimar: Industrie-Comptoir, 1802.
Friedrichs, Elisabeth. Die_eenreenenreenigen
c r' e e es u e t
Leriren. Stuttgart: Metzler, 1981.
Geiger, Ludwig. "Eine AusgestoBene. Elise Bfirger."
Dielneei 3 (1902): 156-65.
Gerhard, C. "Bfirger's dritte Gattin. Skizze zur

Erinnerungen an seinen 150 Geburtstag am 31. Dez."

Digaekeiien 306 (1901-02): 1897.

129
Goedecke. Karl. Grnndrisz_zur_Gesshishte_der_deutsshen

Dnelien. Bd. 5, 7. Dresden: Ehlerman, 1884.

G2ttfried_Angust_Bnrgers_3hestandsgesshishte- Berlin:
Schulz, 1812.

GroB. Heinrich. 2estsshlands_nishterinen_nnd
9-1“ ‘ 1‘1' '1‘ '2-9;- :1: ° .
Wien: Gerold, 1882.

---. I-- : 9- D' 9 e, ,-, -12 , ' - - - fee; -1 .-
nne_Diig. Berlin: Thiel, 1885.

HerloBsohn, C., Ed. ame v - . 2. Bd.
Adorf: Verlags-Bureau, 1846.

Kinder. Hermann. Bflrsers_Lishei__neknmente_zu_nlise
18!!f_!°. i P °'_=_1° - . ‘u ' :1 g e 1‘ 19‘
znrgnren. Frankfurt: Insel Verlag, 1981.

Kosch, Wilhelm. ° - ' a

h' db . 2. Bd. Mfinchen:

Francke, 1914.

Krekler. Ingeborg- Kataleg_der_hands§hriftlisheh
Theaterhnsher_des_eheseligen_flnrtemhursisshen
flefirneerere. Wiesbaden: Harrasowitz, 1979.

Krfiger, Hermann Anders. Denreenee_Lirerernr:Leriken.
Mfinchen: Beck, 1914.

Laddey, E. "Aus den letzten Tagen einer Vielgenannten,
Elise Bfirger." Derrenienne 1872: 126-128.

Mentzel, Elizabeth. "Neues fiber Elise Bfirger." Dfinne_nne
Eelt1__Eenatssshrift_fnr_das_dentsshe_znnst:_nnd
Geisteslehen 1 (1912-13): 371-378.

130
Pfister, Kurt. "Drei Frauen um Gottfried August Bfirger."

Erauens2hisksale_aus_§_lahrhhnderten VOH Kurt Pfister.
Mfinchen: Nymphenburger Verlagshandlung (1949):

230-36.
Rassmann, Friedrich. eu e e end
Dishter_gnd_§2hriftsteller- Helmstadt: n- 9-. 1823-

Richel, Arthur. ”Die letzten Tage des Schwabenmfidchens."

Air-Frankfurr 2 (1929): 13-14.

Rotermund, Heinrich Wilhelm. s e ver 0 e
'.o -; , T, : - .- 1 u,. _c1 : - e_ ,,-, a
seit_Qer_Bef2rmatien_geleht_hahen_hnd_nesh_lehen.
Bremen: n. p., 1823.
Schiefer, K. Elise Bfirger. ' ' u sc
Literat2r:_und_Theatergesshishte- Frankfurt am Main:

0188., 1921.

Schindel, Carl Wilhelm Otto August von. Die_genreenen
Senrifretelierinnen ges nenngehnren ganrnnngerts.
Leipzig: Brockhaus, 1823.

Schrfiter, O. "Beitrage zur Familiengeschichte G. A.

Bfirgers." Menefieiger_D1§rrer 7 (1893): 156-61.
Schulz, Ferdinand, Ed. §r_Ay_DDrgere
es n s esc c t es c er d 't Eh .
e s ' a u v -S . Berlin:

Schulz, 1812.

Schfitze, Karl. De sch s ' e un S r tstel on

den_iltesten_zeiten_his_auf_die_§egenxart- Berlin:
Bach, 1862.

131

Wurst, Karin A. aue s a des achtze ten
lenrnnngerre. (Accepted Manuscript).
Wurzbach, Wolfgang von. fi e . e eben

Werke. Gettingen, 1848.

"xiiiiiiiiifiiiiiiiiii