Woyzeck: the play. My second year Drama essay

On the evidence of Woyzeck, ‘Buchner strikes us as having an extraordinary sensibility, modern preoccupations, even modern politics... Because of his seminal influence he has been seen as an astonishing precursor of various trends in modern drama'. (Stone, B. (1977) the beginning of modern drama, A307, units 12-13, Milton Keynes: open university press).

Discuss the modernity of Buchner’s play and its later influence on different modernisms

This paper shall reveal the elements of modernity in Buchner's Woyzeck alongside the realistic aspects that reflected the era in which it was written. As a result this paper will form a structured argument trying to decipher whether Buchner's play was in fact modernist, realist or a play in which both categories were joined. Scholar’s debates surrounding whether the structure of the unfinished play was intentional has arisen numerous times. These debates form the basis of the arguments that this essay will explore in order to figure out which category the play falls within; beginning with the realistic aspects and following on to the modernistic aspects.

Georg Buchner's Woyzeck falls in between a period of realism and modernism, (McLeish, K. 1996) by being one of the first “realistic” plays to change its form and structure when it was not seen as a drama norm. Although written during the “era of realism” (early 19th century) aspects of his play do not fit with the sociological or political structure of his time. These moments are what lead people to class his play as “modernist”. By revealing definitions and moments that fitted the realistic\melodrama era and then further looking into the modernist qualities of Buchner’s work, an argument can be made about whether his work does in fact fit into a genre.

During the 1820’s-1830’s (ten-seventeen years before Woyzeck was written) there was a craze in the era to produce “domestic melodrama” (2017. 19th century theatre). This meant that real life horror stories were told through theatre in a specific form. As Woyzeck was written from a true-crime in this age, Buchner was following the traditional drama of his time. Buchner, at the age of seven, would have seen and\or heard the beginning of this craze in 1822 with plays such as “Marie Marten and murder in the red barn”. This means that the idea behind the play gives a realistic feel, being based off of real life and portraying a scenario that could (as it did) happen.

Once 24, he based his final play off of a real crime fifteen years prior in Germany. This became a stimulus for the play, focusing on the build up and moment of the murder of Woyzeck's wife Marie and the exploration of his mental state. The case grabbed public attention as it was the first to use an insanity defence causing “Forensic expert Dr. J. A. Clarus [to] examine Woyzeck over a three-year period” (Johann Christian Woyzeck. 2011). The use of insanity as a defence began to change the German Law making it a turning point in Germany’s history and as a result an important social and political event discussed by many. This event allowed the politics surrounding mental health to be readjusted to consider a more “modernist approach” by delaying a sentencing to understand the human condition. The maturity brought from this trial foreshadows modernist works which this paper shall look further into. Here was an opportunity for Buchner to trial public viewpoints around the stimulus.

Buchner was seven years old at the time of the trial and as a result of living through it would have been exposed to many people discussing it over his head and later with him, arguably causing a more open opinion on the subject. Files from the trial were sitting in his family home, through Buchner's father’s work as a doctor (Stone, B. 1977: 23), which strongly suggests he drew original influence for his play from the primary data. This can also be shown in the way he wrote the play; by directly taking quotes from the trial and placing them as dialogue. Kenneth McLeish wrote how Buchner “kept many details from the case reports, used several words and phrases from the original documents- but completely changed the perspectives” (McLeish, K. 1996)

To flip the perspective of the trial in this play, Buchner challenged the social hierarchy of the time that saw the richer as “better people” and the working class as “wrong”. By changing the doctor from a “real life ... Pompous but honest ass- into a middle class buffoon and charlatan” and Woyzeck from isolated to someone who has dignity exploited by higher ranks (McLeish, K. 1996). Here Buchner was able to exploit a craze to portray his political viewpoint by the form of melodrama to allow the rich “doctor” to be flipped into a villain without being overly questioned.

The melodrama at the beginning of the 19th century sought to appeal to a working class audience. It has been stated that the “heroes and heroines were nearly always from the working class and the baddies were aristocrats” (2017. 19th century theatre). Therefore, Buchner even though challenging the convention of the real life case, followed the format of making a play around the working class hero (Woyzeck) and having the villain as the doctor (seen as a ‘higher-class citizen due to his\her social class). It could be argued that Georg Buchner chose the case of Woyzeck as he had more familiarity with the case due to his father’s files. Therefore with his experience discovered how the case perfectly summed up his political ideas whilst fitting into the drama form.

The play explores how people in power exploit the lower class and follows Woyzeck who lives in poverty. By using the early melodrama characteristics and the real story, he has been able to express this viewpoint safely without any political backlash from the government. “During Clarus' examinations, Woyzeck seems to have broken down- not so much mentally as spiritually. He ranted about poverty and the injustice of life” (McLeish, K. 1996) which Buchner would have read and seen as a topic to discuss through art. This theme was suited to Buchner's needs as in 1834 he was arrested for political involvement and “escaped punishment by grovelling to the authorities and to his family (promising to avoid all politics in future) ... threw himself into work for his doctorate... and into playwriting “ (McLeish, K. 1996)

The comparisons between the real case and the play, 15 years later show the stance of the social and personal economy of Germany at the time. Bruford stated how “the popular figures for Germany in the 19tg century are a sufficient indication that her economic state was nearer to that of the middle ages than that of the 19th century” (bruford, W. H. 1935: 157), showing more and more how people struggled in their day to day life being out of a middle and upper class bracket. Woyzeck was “raised into poverty” (Johann Christian Woyzeck. 2011) whereas Buchner was in a middle-class position. His family status allowed an exit from punishment when he was arrested in 1834. Buchner uses this personal touch to explore, safely within the means of melodrama, how he felt the country should be. Within Buchner's impression of Woyzeck (being positive Ashe empathises to the real person) the plot “was often told from viewpoint of the .... hero” (Cash, J. 2014). Evidence of this is shown in the opening character list; where only Woyzeck and his wife are named and the other characters become a personification around their job. This further shows his investment into the real story and play, working to show different angles or allow the popular case to be seen a-fresh. Buchner’s outside interest into human rights and the form allowing Woyzeck to be viewed impartially shows his focus on “inner qualities of...humanity” other than the polished-view of society naturalism failed to show. Buchner stated “the life of the rich is one long Sunday. They live in fine houses, they wear elegant clothes. They have well-fed faces and speak a language of their own. But the people lie before them like dung on the fields” (Young Genius. 2005: 3). These points are factors to argue how Buchner may not be a revolutionist in drama but merely used what documentary material was at his disposal and other forms already created to disguise his forward thinking opinions in drama.

Buchner’s political involvement seeped into his playwriting years, exploring human rights and government power. These themes were later explored in the 20th century as human rights issues became public knowledge and discussion. Krasner States that “to be modern as...Woyzeck...is to be cognizant of the alienation for authority and to understand the powerless it creates” (Krasner, D. 2011: 12). Meaning that it can be argued that ideas foreshadows those of the century after him, meaning his modernity could have been from his political ideas and not the way in which he wrote.

If he insanity defence is taken back into consideration, it allowed mental health to become a topic to talk about instead of a taboo to society. Dr Clarus began investigating Woyzeck over a three year period. Even though this case was a first step forward for psychological understanding, Clarus was quick to state Woyzeck could understand right from wrong and should receive full punishment. Within three months Clarus had fully judged him and tried to close the case. These moments show; both how much psychological procedures have advanced, with longer and more in detail tests, and how socially the topic was not ready for the era (2011. Jonathan Christian Woyzeck). Later in the 20th century topics of mental health and study of the mind became “popular” and there was public knowledge of experiments. Buchner’s mind was therefore thinking on the same side ideas how modern psychologists were.

Within Woyzeck the play, the “pea experiment” was not to be known by anyone outside the experiment and carried shame for Woyzeck to have to be part of one. This became areas that he explored “alienation for authority...to understand the powerlessness it creates” (Krasner, D. 2011:12). He is stuck being exploited by his need for money to support his wife Marie and their child. To aid his family the doctor put him on a diet of only peas, which eventually deteriorated his mental health. Buchner adds subtleties to the play in the subtext to show the disjointed relationship he has with his wife, how it is strained by his social class, and that no matter how hard he tries for money (being a lab rat) he cannot compete. The following extract highlights one of these “struggles”;

“WOYZECK: Nothing but work under the sun; we even sweat in our sleep. The poor. Some more money Marie. My pay and some extra from the captain.

MARIE: god reward you, Franz

WOYZECK: got to go. See you tonight

(Woyzeck leaves)

MARIE: oh! I'm a bad bitch...” (Buchner, G.1996:21)

This scene portrays Marie's excepted response for being given money for their family “God reward you” to then change her idolect, class and formality to “I’m a bad bitch” once he has left. This change from her shows she understands “right from wrong” and their relationship of surpressing their issues. Earlier in the scene, Marie was besotted with some gold earnings that were given to her from her lover, which shows the life she wished she had and her dismantle with the scraping other barrel working class life with Franz Woyzeck. The shame is shown from Woyzeck seeming to ignore the fact shevhas gold earrings and focus on their child. He works to give her money knowing she has a hidden life from him. Buchner is exploring ideas brought in the modernist era with psychological experiments on obedience to power tested by Asch and Pavlov.

Karl Marx was another modern thinker before his time. Born in 1818, he believed “all human history had been based on class struggles” (2014. Karl Marx 1818-1883). In the above scene, Buchner is exploring relationships between two social classes with one woman, Marie. Buchner tests his theory by flipping the characters social classes (by following melodrama format) to see how it changed audience and social perspective. Marx's life was similar to Buchner’s in the sense that his work was not socially appreciated until after his death. “Although he [Marx] was largely ignored in his own lifetime, his social, economic and political ideas gained rapid acceptance in the socialist movement after his death in 1883” (Kreis, S. 2000) which was similar to Buchner with his play only being performed in 1913 and having any recognition. Both of these influential men, went through periods of being “poor” and living first hand what it was like to be working class. Buchner “is often viewed as a sort of proto-Marxist. His writings are filled with premonitions of class warfare. On occasion his characters spout atheist sentiments and denounce religion as a tool for class repression” (Horton, D. G. 2001:12). Buchner’s atheism has been seen in his aesthetics according to Hans Mayer, “expressed concretely in the relationship of his figures to nature, society and history. His demand for life in the art is less a call for realistic correctness than a critical expression” (Richards, D. G. 2001:12). In Mayer’s point of view, Buchner has been modern in his approach to producing Woyzeck by having him detached from social expectations (Woyzeck is in the wrong due to his social class) and testing the historical documentation of the real-trial by flipping the perspective.

In 1935, Solomon Asch conducted an experiment to test “the extent to which social pressures from a majority group could affect a person to conform” (McLeod, S. 2008). This study was in the peak of interest by the public about how the brain and individuals work; ideas that Buchner was dealing with in thec19th century. Buchner was discovering how people act and how they are “forced” to act within the social class they are born into, and the repercussions of this (being pressured to be a participant in an experiment that deteriorated your mental health to the point of killing your wife). The experiments that followed the century after show that Buchner’s mind, politically, was far more advanced than the ideas that were being shared in that time. As a result, Buchner had to surpress a lot of his viewpoints and hide them within melodramatic forms of play and subtext. A century later, Asch was discovering how people are powerless to authority by being a minority group. Buchner changed a historical way the Woyzeck case was viewed by creating a play at the minority group, Woyzeck, and his viewpoint to the world.

When writing Woyzeck, Buchner wrote scene at a time but did not assemble them into a chronological order before his passing. Linguists struggled to determine an order to arrange the scenes as one did not flow into the next as it would in a narrative form. This added to the delay of publishing (1875) and performing (1912) of Woyzeck to the public. Some argue that this way was due to the play being unfinished and Buchner could have produced links from one scene to another. However, thus style of writing foreshadows Brecht's episodic structure with its to-the-point stage directions, writing styles and scene format.

For example; looking at both the opening description from ‘Woyzeck’ and' Maria Marten and murder in the red barn', both being 19th century melodramas, we can see the difference in the opening descriptions. The opening of Woyzeck states “the woods. Andres is splitting sticks and whistling the tune of his song. Woyzeck comes into him” (Buchner, G. 1996:2). Buchner asserts the point of who of who is on stage , what they are doing, and where with as little words as possible. This allows for more artistic creativity whilst insisting on vital elements.

In contrast Marie Marten and murder in the red barn opens stating the entirety of the cast is on stage singing and “actors” to give a narration before the following stage directions “the curtain opens revealing the exterior of the Marten's cottage. The cast enter as country folk carrying food and drink and take their places singing” (Denys, C:7). In opposition to buchner , the playwright is more assertive on location (being limited to a curtained stage), what is on stage, who and how they are behaving.

It is essential to mention the structure Buchner received this evidence, the Clarus report. This layout runs parallel to the episodic structure – mimicking subsections and categories, which is still used as a layout in 21st century legal proceedings. It could be argued that this style of writing is as a reflected result if the Clarus report, which would discredit other arguments that Buchner was writing in 19th century format. A similarity can be shown and possible inspiration to start intentionally writing in an episodic structure by writing a play to mimic the report. Kenneth McLeish backs up this idea up by explaining how the play “conformed to the presentational methods of science and not of art” from having “the original material of Woyzeck...[as] a medical case study” (McLeish, k. 1996: 7). Here you can see how the play is written scientifically, in the route Georg Buchner was forced to continue down, and as a result detached from emotion. Using his scientific mind, that was highly encouraged by his family and society he created a fact-filled experiment of a play. Buchner’s influence on modernism spanned into many practitioners and stems off of the movement, such as expressionism, documentary and epic theatre.

Buchner’s last existing scene is Woyzeck washing the knife after the murder, never concluding his sentencing or answers his mental state. This starts to show the detached nature of Buchner’s writing, to not show any emotion positive or negative towards Woyzeck by a sentence. This openers also follows the expressionist style to allow an audience to create their own interpretation and allows the play to be thought about politically, by deciding how you think he should be sentenced, instead of giving the spectators all the information.

Pre-expressionistic qualities include the”characteristic rejection not simply of previous movements but of the tradition of art in its entirety “ (Murphy, R. 1999: 2). By having characters listed as “the doctor” and the only named characters being Woyzeck and his family, Buchner rebelled against previous formats. This style is now seen as a certified style of writing, whereas previous!y was unheard of. An argument can be made that this was not intentional, and that he would later go on to re-name all characters. Regardless, Woyzeck was one if the first plays to have this quality and still influenced other playwrights, such as Brecht to rebel from the artistic norm. Now part if expressionism is to have a lack of individuality between characters, to sum them up by personality or working traits rather than a name. Murphy has gone so far to suggest that the “expressionist avant-garde pre-emps postmodernism in deconstructing and rewriting the established images and constructions of the world” (Murphy’s R. 1995: 5) meaning that not only has Buchner influenced modernism but postmodernism to bring the idea of rebellion to the type of standardized drama of its time.

Documentary theatre was inspired by movements and became popular again in the 1920’s (Leach, R: 2008: 63). Although being seen as a modern convention, as it re--told stories to convey a political point, it began around 492BC (Cash, J. 2014) and was also used in domestic melodrama by telling true stories in theatre. The original re-use of the theatrical form was to be a “living newspaper” so the new government in Russia could ensure the poor who could not read would know the latest political upheveals, becoming parallel to Buchner using it as another document to learn and spread about the 1837 case. In addition, Buchner focused on the political aspect of treatment of lower class and authority power, which “later documentary playmakers sought a more objective theatre of fact” (Leach, R. 2008: 62). The interlinking aspects of Buchner’s writing can be seen in varying modernist movements going on tovshow how “documentary... Owes something to epic theatre” (Leach, R. 2008: 62), which in turn owes to Buchner from his, intentional or not, rebellion to standardised drama.

In summary, Buchner rebelled against many conventions at the time of realism and melodrama. He detached himself from characters and had them named by occupation, wrote in contrasting scenes without a seamless link from one scene to another, used real reports on a well known case as a stimulus to a story. This paper has shown how his “scientific background” could have forced and moulded this approach leading to modernism as we know it. It cannot be definitively said if he was fully a modernist or realist writer due to his untimely death, but it is visible to see where both qualities appear. This paper has therefore explored how he fits into both aspects of drama, but in either instant was an inspirational playwright to bring writing forward that brought about change. Buchner wrote about the modernist “viewpoint” in human rights (which seeped into his writing through the maturity of the topic) through a realistic approach.