Maria Stuart (Stefan Zweig)
Maria Stuart , written by Stefan Zweig , is the best-known biography of the Scottish Queen Maria Stuart from the pen of a German-speaking author.
Zweig portrays Maria Stuart, who is often presented in contrast to him, as vividly as Elizabeth I , her great opponent on the English throne. First published by Reichner in 1935 , the novel-like biography continues to convince readers and critics to this day with its “unbroken suggestiveness”, factual accuracy, psychological acumen, pointed judgments and linguistic brilliance.
content
Mary Queen of Scots was just six days old when she became Queen of Scotland . They immediately began to advertise for them, although Protestant England under Henry VIII ultimately lost out to its strongest competitor, Catholic France under Henry II . As a five-year-old Maria is brought to the French court, where she receives an excellent education and she grows up side by side with her future husband, Francis II . He is 15 and she is 16 when they ascend the throne of France. A good year later, Maria is a widow. Ousted by her mother-in-law Katharina de Medici , she returned to her homeland in 1561. Scotland is religiously divided; Although a devout Catholic herself to the point of death, Maria does not put the aspiring Protestants in their place - above all her half-brother Lord Moray , a cleverly tactical power politician.
On the other hand, Maria is less indulgent when it comes to another question, which harbors far more potential for conflict. She lays claim to the English throne. Elizabeth I , who has had this since 1558, comes from the second marriage of Henry VIII, the legitimacy of which is not undisputed - a flaw that does not cling to her great cousin Maria. Elizabeth was recognized as Queen of England in the Treaty of Edinburgh in 1560, but Mary refused to ratify it. In addition to the Scottish and French, it also has the English crown in its royal coat of arms. Her wish that Elisabeth would personally recognize her as her rightful successor did not come true. Her great rival, who remains unmarried and childless all her life, is only ready to give in when it comes to preventing one of Mary's suitors, whom she feels as a further threat - Lord Darnley , a grandson of her aunt and thus, like Maria, a candidate their throne.
Elisabeth's admission comes too late. On July 29, 1565, Mary and Darnley married. Although based on love on both sides, disillusionment soon sets in. As Darnley's arrogance increases, so does Maria's passion for him. The favor she now shows her private secretary David Rizzio , of Italian descent, arouses Darnley's jealousy; additionally nourished by rumors that the child Maria is carrying is not his. The foreign upstart is also a thorn in the side of the local lords. Both parties join forces in a murder plot that they deliberately carry out in the queen's room in her presence. The brutal crime changes Maria; from now on she too begins to tact and deceive. She is the first to betray her husband; she wins him back, but only with the intention of having her back free in order - with the support of energetic men, whom she also pulls on her side - to hold the reins of power tighter again. The most daring of her comrades-in-arms, the most independent and at the same time most loyal to her, is Bothwell .
Maria is kindled in ardent love for him. When and how exactly their mutual trust turns into passion remains uncertain; Both commit adultery. The conqueror Bothwell understands their relationship as an episode, Mary as the passion of her life. Only one thing can hold him and bind him to it - the crown. This is not free. It is true that one desperately wants to get rid of whoever carries them, the Scottish lords agree on this with Maria, even before they know about their relationship with Bothwell; they assure her that she is doing the right thing and that she should leave the how to them. On the night of February 10, 1567, there is a huge explosion in Kirk o 'Field , where Darnley is staying; he is found dead in the garden. Bothwell obtained his acquittal in court and is still considered the main culprit. Dark shadows fall on Mary too; Several clues speak for her complicity, if not complicity: her role as a decoy for the victim, her eloquent silence after his death, the hasty and secret marriage to Bothwell and the agony she fell into afterwards. The Lords now turn against them; under pressure, she separates from Bothwell, abdicates in favor of her one-year-old son and is arrested in Loch Leven Castle . After a year she escapes spectacularly, gathers loyal followers, is defeated in a decisive battle and, hoping for political asylum, flees on to England.
Elisabeth's first impulse is to receive Mary according to her royal dignity. Under the influence of her advisors, she moves away from it and makes it a condition that Maria must first be exempted from any suspicion of complicity in Darnley's murder. At first Maria countered this, only recognizing someone of her rank - in other words: Elisabeth herself - as a judge, but finally gave in and faced the "conference" set up by the British Privy Council, at which, as the main material against her, her " cassette letters " were also presented Bothwell be put forward. The process ends ambiguously: Maria is neither guilty nor acquitted. This not-before-nor-back is now a permanent condition for them for more than 15 years. Although she is granted a dignified life, she is held captive; you let them conspire, but you know about everything. It was not until the mid-1580s that the situation came to a head to the disadvantage of Mary: Her son Jakob refused to attempt a reconciliation and instead secured the succession to Elisabeth's throne behind her back; a letter of abuse from Mary to Elisabeth makes an understanding between the two seem a long way off; the Counter-Reformation acutely threatens the life of the English queen. Under the auspices of her Secretary of State Walsingham , an intrigue is arranged that aims to get Mary to approve an attack on Elizabeth in writing. It works. The trial against Maria ends with the death sentence. Elisabeth hesitates half a year before signing it. Mary was beheaded on February 8, 1587.
- main characters
Emergence
After completing his work on Marie Antoinette and Erasmus von Rotterdam , Zweig, by his own admission, had "had enough of biographies" and actually wanted to write "a long-planned novel". A visit to the British Museum in London dissuaded him from his plan. Inspired by the handwritten report on the execution of Maria Stuart that was exhibited there, he bought a book about her. It transfigured them as "saints". The second one he got himself said was "just about the opposite". Zweig then asked for a "really reliable" book about her, but no one could give him one. That piqued his curiosity completely. Weeks of research in libraries followed, so that he began to write about Maria Stuart himself “without knowing it” - again in the form of a biography . When he drove home to Austria at the beginning of 1934 , he had made up his mind to return to "beloved" London in order to "finish it in silence". The following year it was first published by Reichner , Vienna .
Premises
Zweig acknowledges his curiosity with the very first sentence: “The clear and the obvious are self-explanatory, but the secret is creative.” With this, he aims directly at what makes Mary Queen of Scots so attractive to many, readers and authors, for what it is regarded as the “downright classic example of the crown”: its “inexhaustible mystery”. Even within the short introduction, however, Zweig limits this and reduces the “mystery” of Mary to a human level: “In itself, the character of Mary Queen of Scots is not that mysterious: it is only inconsistent in its external developments, but internally from the beginning to the end straightforward and clear at the end. "
Zweig's curiosity did not die out with this realization, it only shifted in the course of the research. What ignites him as Maria's biographer is the discovery that he sees the type of woman embodied in her, who does not carefully distribute her ability to experience over her life span, but rather bundles it in a few years and lives it out in a single passion. This is the central thesis of his interpretation of the person Maria Stuart.
In addition to the promise of a certain demystification and the promise of a "very rare and exciting" type of woman, Zweig also advertises on his own behalf. In his view, those who preceded him, be they biographers or poets, are almost invariably tainted with the stigma of being biased in some way, mainly national or religious. He sees himself free from that. He claims to be no less “passionate” and yet at the same time “impartial”; he cannot and does not want to completely exclude subjectivity and nevertheless strives for judgments which he “perceives as objectivity with the best of his knowledge and belief”; he knows that “the exclusive truth” is unattainable and sees himself, as a biographer, as a “real seeker of truth”.
shape
genre
The biography, which is just as thoroughly researched as it is easy to understand, cannot be clearly assigned to any sub-genre . A list of the main characters is put in front, similar to a drama ; however, there is no complete register of names or keywords. Above all, Zweig refrains from providing any evidence of the sources he used. Although he recognizes that he draws from many and incorporates all trend-setting events from Maria's life, his biography does not make any scientific or academic claim. A biographical novel is Maria Stuart but also not. Unlike Schiller, for example, in his drama of the same name , Zweig does not invent anything that has not been handed down, neither quotations nor entire scenes. However, he paints them in, occasionally immerses himself in the inner world of his protagonists and reproduces their possible thoughts and feelings as if they were actual . So at times he acts like an authoritative narrator , without indicating this . This of course makes what is described more vivid for the reader. The use of the historical present also contributes to this.
style
Representing many other text passages, here is the end of the eighth chapter, in which the planning and execution of the murder of Rizzio , Maria's private secretary, is described:
“The conspiracy succeeded down to the last detail. In the courtyard the mangled corpse of her best servant swims in a pool of blood, at the head of her enemies stands the King of Scotland, for he has now been awarded the crown, while she herself no longer even has the right to leave her own room. With a jolt she fell from the highest level, passed out, abandoned, without helpers, without friends, surrounded by hatred and scorn. Everything seems lost to her in this terrible night; but a hot heart is hardened under the hammer of fate. Maria Stuart always finds more strength in herself than with all her helpers and servants, especially in the moments when it is her freedom, her honor, her kingship. "
Several things catch the eye. On the one hand, there are accumulations , alliterations and metaphors - examples of stylistic devices that Zweig often uses. On the other hand, the “high pitch”, which is not atypical for him. Thirdly, the care he takes in designing the chapter transitions, usually closing with an intellectual generalization and a dramaturgical increase in tension - only to then vary both of these with the first sentence of the following chapter. In the present case, the opening sentence of Chapter 9 reads: "In the human sense, danger is always happiness for Mary Stuart."
Shakespeare
Analogies from literature and mythology are used by Zweig to shed more light on the phase in Maria's life, which he calls “tragedy of a passion”: her relationship with Bothwell , the presumed main mastermind in the murder of her second husband, Lord Darnley . Enlightenment can be found in several of Shakespeare's most famous dramas , whom Zweig consults as contemporaries of Mary and Elizabeth and admires as an expert on the human psyche. He compares Shakespeare's idea of having Romeo's great love for Juliet be preceded by an “infatuation with some Rosalinde” with the two phases of the awakening of Maria's love passion: first sparked by the encounter with Darnley, then fully sparked by the one with Bothwell. Maria's haste on her third marriage reminds him of Hamlet's mother Gertrud, who just as hastily marries her husband's murderer. Zweig Macbeth is considered to be the reference drama par excellence , less because of the setting (Scotland) and the crime (regicide) than because the mental states of the protagonists are strikingly similar after the deed: increasing hardening in Macbeth / Bothwell; Loneliness, joylessness, agony with Lady Macbeth / Maria. The question is whether this an admission of guilt and should be seen for Maria, leaves branch.
Ratings
The reader of Zweig's biography gains a clear picture of everything, the events described and the people involved. This is primarily due to the fact that the author himself has made a clear picture of everything he tells. The reader only becomes aware that he constantly evaluates his narrative when Zweig distances himself decidedly; he does not do this often, and only once by name ( Schiller ). The fact that, when other assessment criteria fail, he consults psychology as the “ultimate yardstick” is one of the premises on which he was committed at the beginning. Not infrequently, however, he argues historically and politically. For example, he counters the “artificial and untruthful” legend, which Maria wants to stylize as a Scottish patriot in retrospect , that the rulers of that time did not yet think nationally, with one exception - Elisabeth.
This difference, which Zweig generalizes elsewhere - Mary was generally more attached to the old and Elisabeth was more oriented towards the new - is just one of many examples that shows that the author, especially in the question of whether or not, which is so crucial for his credibility, is he does justice to both queens equally, by no means takes one-sided side for those whose title his biography bears. He expresses both praise and criticism, respect and incomprehension to both. However, there are also other views on this. Anka Muhlstein, for example, assesses Zweig's position in her double biography of the two queens as follows: “The writer, fascinated by her [Maria Stuart], excuses all the mistakes of his heroine and casts a merciless look at her rival [Elizabeth I], whose fault it would be not to be like all other women. ”Dieter Wunderlich, who quotes this statement in his review of Zweig's biography, strongly contradicts her. He sees reason for criticism more in the image of women, which is expressed in some of Zweig's statements.
Maria and Elisabeth
The sixth chapter, one of the analytical focal points of the book, is devoted to the comparison between the two main characters of his biography, Maria Stuart and Elisabeth I. Both prove to be protagonists and antagonists not only in a dramaturgical sense . While Zweig deals with what they have in common on a brief page, he spends no less than ten on the differences. He gains the most important similarities between Maria and Elisabeth through a simple comparison: Measured against their contemporary male counterparts on Europe's royal thrones, both women were personalities "of the greatest size" and far surpassed them in terms of intelligence, education, artistic sense and ambition. Apart from that, however, they embodied an almost ideal typical pair of opposites.
In his eyes, he sketches the diametrical course of her “life lines” as follows: “It is difficult for Elisabeth at the beginning and Maria Stuart at the end. Maria Stuart's happiness and power rise lightly, brightly and quickly like a morning star in a clear sky; [...] but her fall is just as steep and sudden. ”Her life, which culminates in a few catastrophes, predestines her for tragedy , whereas an“ epically broad representation ”is better suited to trace Elisabeth's“ slow and persistent ascent ” . The biographical contrast between the two queens ("that one is born with the crown as with her own hair, while the other fought for her position, achieved, conquered"), according to Zweig's conviction, had to compel her characters "deep into shape each vibration and tone ”differently. Nevertheless, each developed a different force from it.
“With Maria Stuart creates the ease and effort with which she does everything - too soon! - was assigned a very unusual frivolity and self-confidence, she gives her that daring daring that is her greatness and her fate. [...] As swift and as hot as the hilt of a sword, she makes up her mind, and just as she disregards hurdles and obstacles as a daring rider with a crack on the reins, she also thinks about all the difficulties and dangers of politics with the bare lively courage to storm over. ”For her, ruling means“ an increase in the lust for existence, a fighting game of a knightly kind ”, for Elisabeth, however,“ a chess game, a mind game, a constant tense effort. [...] Carefully and fearfully, as if they were made of glass [...], Elisabeth holds the crown and scepter; actually she spends her whole life in worry and indecision. ”Nevertheless, her“ eternal hesitation and hesitation ”have proven to be a great strength in the long term in the state-political sense. "Because if Maria Stuart is only herself, Elisabeth lives her country, she as a realist dutifully accepts her rulership, while Maria Stuart, the romantic, takes her kingship as a completely unconditional vocation."
It was therefore no coincidence, said Zweig, “that Maria Stuart was the champion of the old, Catholic religion and Elizabeth was the patron of the new, Reformation . [...] Maria Stuart - and this is what makes her figure so romantic - stands or falls for a past, for an obsolete cause as the last daring paladin . [...] [She] remains rigid in what has been adopted, she does not get beyond the dynastic conception of royalty. In their opinion, the country is tied to the ruler, but the ruler is not tied to his country; in fact, Mary Queen of Scots has only been Queen of Scotland for all these years and never a Queen for Scotland. ”The exact opposite, from Zweig's point of view, is Elizabeth. “Out of her misfortune as a woman [she] shaped the happiness of her country. The childless and the manless have transformed all their egoism and their passion for power into the national. […] Nothing gave Elizabeth such a rank among the monarchs of that epoch than that she did not want to be master of England, but merely the administrator of the English people's will, servant of a national mission; she has understood the trend of the times, which leads from the autocratic to the constitutional . "
In summary, Zweig describes the contrast between Mary and Elisabeth “in space, time and his figures” as “great”, in order to limit his praise in the same sentence with a rebuke: “If only the way in which he was fought would not be so pathetic ! ”To blame for this deficiency, he says without further ado, is“ the weakness of their sex ”, the fact that“ despite their outstanding stature, both women remain women ”. Speculatively, he continues: “If instead of Maria Stuart and Elizabeth there were two men standing opposite two kings, there would immediately be a sharp argument and a clear war. Demand stood against demand, courage against courage. The conflict between Maria Stuart and Elisabeth, on the other hand, lacks this bright masculine sincerity; it is a catfight, a sneaking around and watching with hidden claws, a sneaky and thoroughly dishonest game. […] No, the chronicle of the war between Elisabeth and Maria Stuart […] is not a heroic song, but a perfidious chapter from Machiavelli , psychologically extremely exciting, but morally repugnant because a twenty-year intrigue and never an honest, sounding fight. "
In addition to this intrigue, in which the two women are more similar than different, there is a second aspect of comparison, which Zweig - perhaps no less vulnerable - treats as primarily gender-specific. It concerns their ability, or willingness, to have personal love, attachment, and devotion. Here the contradiction is evident: what the one sought resolutely, the other has shakily avoided; Maria married three times and gave birth to three children (including a miscarriage of twins), Elisabeth remains unwed and childless despite numerous advertisements. Elisabeth's “misfortune as a woman” has not been unequivocally established to this day, and Zweig does not add any of his own to the speculations and only cites two contemporary sources, including Maria, who does not omit this sore point in her vicious letter (Elisabeth is physically “not like all other women "). At least Zweig seems “certain that a physical or mental inhibition has disturbed [Elisabeth] in the most secret areas of her femininity”. Her “inner uncertainty” explains to him the “unpredictable nature of her decisions” and ultimately also that she was unable to “give herself completely”.
It is precisely at this point, “total self-giving,” that Zweig is fascinated by Mary's individual unfolding. The fact that he ties them so closely to an alleged gender specific seems a bit antiquated from today's perspective, if not outright inappropriate. - At a young age Maria practiced “feminine restraint” for a long time, was “remarkably sensitive (like every truly feminine nature)” before she then “found her real, her true power in a passion - all in all only once in her life “Discovered. “But then you can feel how incredibly strong a woman is, how very impulsive and instinctual being, as if chained to her sex without will. Because in this great moment of her ecstasy the upper, the cultural forces in the previously cool and measured woman suddenly vanish as if torn away [...], and when faced with the choice between her honor and her passion, Maria as a real woman does not acknowledge her Kingship, but to her womanhood. [...] Nothing gives her figure such generosity as that she has thrown empire, power and dignity downright contemptuously for the sake of individual, fully lived moments of existence. "
reception
"Psychological interpretations age quickly like all zeitgeist, but Stefan Zweig's description hardly seems dusty, but unbroken suggestive [...] He uses the trick of first grasping history, the coincidental, confused events in a clear picture, characterizing players and opponents, as if he had known her [...] Then only after everything has become poetry, an episode of a novel, a novel or a scene in a drama, does he interpret. "
Maria Stuart was met with great enthusiasm. The biography was translated into ten languages as early as 1935; there are now translations in 31 languages and it has been reviewed in international newspapers. Joseph Gregor , theater scholar and Zweig's successor as librettist for Richard Strauss , compares them in the Neue Freie Presse with the strongest novels of Zweig and writes:
"... [and] nd that is the most praiseworthy thing that can be said of historical poetry, because their figures appear - not as if they were or had lived, but as if they lived and worked in ourselves."
Strauss himself commented on the work in a letter dated May 4, 1935 to Zweig and describes it as “very interesting”, but in the same sentence emphasizes the “ingenious instinct” with which Schiller “again grasps the essentials of the subject " have. The opera Maria Stuart, based on Zweig's work, with a libretto by Jakow Gordin and music by Sergei Michailowitsch Slonimski was shown in Leipzig in 1984 after it had premiered in Russia.
Web links
Individual evidence
- ↑ a b Jens Bisky , in Süddeutsche Zeitung , June 2, 2007. Quoted from: Dieter Wunderlich: Stefan Zweig: Maria Stuart
- ↑ Stefan Zweig: The world of yesterday , Stockholm 1942. Quotes from: The world of yesterday, Chapter 17 Project Gutenberg-DE (old spelling)
- ^ Stefan Zweig: Maria Stuart ; Fischer Taschenbuch, Frankfurt am Main 1959, pp. 7–11 (old spelling)
- ^ Stefan Zweig: Maria Stuart ; Fischer Taschenbuch, Frankfurt am Main 1959, p. 160/161 (old spelling)
- ^ Stefan Zweig: Maria Stuart ; Fischer Taschenbuch, Frankfurt am Main 1959, p. 162 (old spelling)
- ^ Stefan Zweig: Maria Stuart ; Fischer Taschenbuch, Frankfurt am Main 1959, p. 209, p. 229, p. 237, p. 270–274 (old spelling)
- ^ Stefan Zweig: Maria Stuart ; Fischer Taschenbuch, Frankfurt am Main 1959, p. 105, p. 10, p. 85 (old spelling)
- ^ Stefan Zweig: Maria Stuart ; Fischer Taschenbuch, Frankfurt am Main 1959, p. 109 (old spelling)
- ↑ Dieter Wunderlich: Stefan Zweig: Maria Stuart
- ↑ a b c d e f g Stefan Zweig: Maria Stuart ; Fischer Taschenbuch, Frankfurt am Main 1959, pp. 99–110 (old spelling)
- ↑ a b quoted from Ulrike Tanzer in Stefan-Zweig-Handbuch , p. 421
- ↑ Ulrike Tanzer : 11.4 Maria Stuart (1935). In: Arturo Larcati, Klemens Renoldner, Martina Wörgötter (eds.): Stefan-Zweig-Handbuch. De Gruyter, Boston / Berlin 2018, ISBN 978-3-11-030415-2 , pp. 421-422 (accessed online from de Gruyter ).