shifting perspectives: the narrative strategy in hartmann's “erec”

21

Click here to load reader

Upload: thomas-heine

Post on 21-Jul-2016

222 views

Category:

Documents


5 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Shifting Perspectives: The Narrative Strategy in Hartmann's “Erec”

Orbis Litterarum (1981) 36, 95-115

Shifting Perspectives: The Narrative Strategy in Hartmann’s “Erec”* Thomas Heine, University of California, Santa Cruz

This essay on Hartmann von Aue’s Erec traces related changes in the protagonist and in the narrative perspective. Initially, the narrator’s use of psycho-narration and commentary provides access to Erec’s inner qualities and reflections; the reader’s familiar- ity with the protagonist in the opening episodes parallels the latter’s unproblematic relationship with society. When Erec becomes estranged from his court and Enite, the narrator’s stance shifts accordingly. During the Prubefahrt, the prevailing mode of narra- tion, reportage, reveals no more about Erec’s state of mind than does Erec himself. As a result, Erec’s behavior in this section remains as much of a mystery to the reader as to the other characters in the story. As Erec overcomes his isolation in the final episodes, both the protagonist and the narrator provide insight into the source of Erec’s problem: The narrator penetrates Erec’s exterior, while the protag- onist becomes more talkative and willing to discuss the nature of his difficulties. And yet the lesson to be learned from Erec’s experiences becomes explicit only when he himself expresses it to Mabonagrin. Thus Hartmann places us in a situation analogous to that of his protagonist: Erec’s insights become our insights. Like Erec, we proceed from ignorance to a new understanding of the knight’s proper relationship to society.

Recent studies on the narrator in Hartmann’s Erec have revealed a n interesting paradox: Although the narrator comments freely on the characters and events throughout, he offers little insight into the most puzzling aspect of the tale, the Probefahrt. ’ The lack of scholarly consensus concerning the purpose and function of the journey reflects the ambiguity engendered by the narrator’s silence. In order to account for behavior and events which, though of central importance, receive no elaboration by the narrator, commentators have turned to vague notions of courtly conventions,* assumptions about lost manuscript^,^ or the contradictory explanations by the characters t hem~e lves .~ In their attempts to supply explanations where there are none in the text they have overlooked the significance of the narrative omissions. Kramer’s lengthy examination of Hartmann’s narrators illustrates this tendency: While painstak-

0105-7510/81/020095-21$02.50/0 0 1981 Munksgaard, Copenhagen

Page 2: Shifting Perspectives: The Narrative Strategy in Hartmann's “Erec”

96 Thomas Heine

ingly discussing the variety of rhetorical devices and levels of narration in Erec he proceeds from the assumption that the narrative stance remains static. A quite different approach leads to a radically different understanding of the poem. By focusing our attention not only on what the narrator says, but also on what he does not say, we can recognize several striking shifts in narrative perspective. These shifts correspond to changes in Erec himself.

Hugo Kuhn’s description of the structure of the plot provides a useful starting point for the present discussion. According to Kuhn and others,’ the narrative consists of two distinct series of adventures. Part I takes Erec to Tulmein, where he avenges the insults by Iders’ dwarf, regains his honor, and wins the hand of Enite. His subsequent return to King Arthur’s court provides the occasion for their wedding and an elaborate tournament during which Erec distinguishes himself as a formidable and tireless combatant. The first part closes with the arrival of the newlyweds at Erec’s castle in Karnant.

Kuhn’s most valuable contribution to our understanding of the structure lies in his discussion of the remaining episodes, which he calls Part 11. He demonstrates that each adventure in this first half of the section corresponds to one in the second half; furthermore, “der ‘doppelte Kursus’ entsteht . . . aus der absichtlichen spiegelbildlichen Konstrastierung. zweier Daseinsstufen.”6 In clarifying the relationship between the adventures, Kuhn’s essay has had an enormous influence on subsequent scholarship. Unfortunately his emphasis on Part I1 has led many commentators to formulate interpretations based solely on that part of the tale, with the result that Part I assumes the status of an introduction or “Andeutung”’ to what follows. If we modify Kuhn’s scheme somewhat and place equal weight on Part I and both halves of Part 11, we arrive at a tripartite structure giving greater significance to the opening section.* The following discussion attempts to demonstrate the efficacy of this formulation.

I

The opening episodes of the narrative present a consistent portrayal of the protagonist against which his subsequent development can be measured. First of all, as Ray Boggs has pointed out, Hartmann’s Erec is not introduced as an established hero.’ Particularly at the outset of this section, both the characters and the narrator take note of Erec’s youth and inexperience (e.g. v. 18,145,708- 1 1 , 930).” In attempting to explain Erec’s behavior only in terms of his immaturity, however, Boggs ignores other and contrary indications. Erec’s

Page 3: Shifting Perspectives: The Narrative Strategy in Hartmann's “Erec”

Shifting Perspectives 97

response to the insult by Iders’ dwarf is neither brash nor reckless: “ouch wolde er sich gerochen hiin,/wan das er wislichen/sinem zorne kunde entwichen.” (v. 99-101). Erec likewise demonstrates prudent restraint in his challenge to Iders (v. 724-27) and, under different circumstances, in his acceptance of King Arthur’s generosity (v. 227 1-75). His judiciousness, moreover, is coupled with a respect for social conventions: He feels obliged to have the Queen’s permission before he leaves to follow the dwarf (148-9), and in Tulmein he decides to confront Iders within the confines of an established ritual. After the duel, Erec declines Herzog Iniain’s invitation and returns to Enite’s father, his impov- erished benefactor, to whom he feels indebted.

Another aspect of Erec’s character is his openness and sociability. Although clearly embarrassed by his lack of armor and money when he arrives in Tulmein, Erec nonetheless speaks freely of his situation to Enite’s father. Furthermore, he readily admits his ignorance in a series of questions about Tulmein and Iders. Erec’s sociability is also evident in his dealings with fellow knights at the tournament in Kardigan:

swelher der gesellen sin durch gesellschaft gerouchte daz er sin herberge suochte der wart sch8ne emphangen db mit gruoze baz dan anderswb.

V. 2391-95

In view of Erec’s harsh treatment of Enite later in the tale, the compassion he shows for her at their first meeting is also noteworthy. On that occasion Erec objects to the suggestion that Enite care for his horse. According to Erec, Enite is neither accustomed nor suited to such labor:

hecken muote ir ungemach. zuo ir vater er sprach: “wir sulns die juncvrowen erlbn. ich waene diz selten habe getbn: ez zimt mir selbern vil baz.”

v. 342-46

The narrator’s frequent use of psycho-narration” adds to our knowledge about the protagonist. Sometimes, to be sure, Erec’s unspoken reflections merely reinforce what is already implicit in his words or actions, but more often they reveal aspects of his character which would otherwise remain obscure. By making the reader privy to Erec’s thoughts, the narrator discloses Erec’s own

Page 4: Shifting Perspectives: The Narrative Strategy in Hartmann's “Erec”

98 Thomas Heine

feelings of insecurity and inadequacy. On several occasions, for example, the narrator refers to Erec’s embarrassment and uncertainty in Tulmein (v. 243,301, 560). Likewise, we learn of the sense of urgency that lies behind Erec’s tireless activity at the tournament:

vil dicke gedahte der dar an, in swelhem werde ein junger man in den Crsten jPren stlt, daz er daz immer gerne hl t . er vorhte den langen itewiz deste groezeren vliz glben sine raete wie erz d l wol getaete.

V. 2254-61

The recklessness in combat is more than youthful exuberance;” it is a frantic effort to establish his reputation quickly. Erec’s awareness of his lack of experience also manifests itself as humility. Again, the narrator reveals this trait by sharing Erec’s thoughts with the reader:

guidens urloup mohte er h l n derz dicke vur in hete getln: er endCihte sich niht s6 vollekomen noch an manheit vernomen, daz es im erloubet mohte sin.

V. 2386-90

Thus the narrator makes use of both reportage and psycho-narration to portray respectively the outer and inner life of his protagonist. In his words and actions, we see Erec as he appears to the other characters; on this level, his youth, openness, compassion and physical prowess are prominent. In Erec’s thoughts, we also perceive his inner qualities, humility and insecurity. In addition to employing reportage and psycho-narration, the narrator also presents his own point of view, frequently commenting on the action or addressing his audience with varying degrees of irony and playfulne~s.’~ As Kramer has demonstrated, the narrator makes his presence felt through a number of rhetorical devices, but above all he shows a tendency towards generalization: “Der Erzahlfluss wird . . . immer wieder um der Typisierung willen unterbrochen” (80).

A brief examination of the relationship between Erec and Enite as depicted in Part I demonstrates the multiple perspectives offered by the narrator. First, the lovers’ growing affection manifests itself externally in long amorous gazes (v.

Page 5: Shifting Perspectives: The Narrative Strategy in Hartmann's “Erec”

Shifting Perspectives 99 ~~ ~

1490-91, 1861-65) and in their impatience for the wedding. The narrator also catalogues the lovers’ emotions, thereby revealing the degree of their mutual attraction (e.g. v. 1492-94, 1845-88). Scattered throughout these descriptions one finds additional indications of the narrator’s own point of view; for example:

zewire ich iu daz sagen wil, d2 was der Minnen gewin: diu Minne richsete under in und vuocte in gr6zen ungemach. d6 einz daz antier ane sach, d6 enwas in beiden niht baz dan einem habeche, der im sin maz von geschihte zougen bringet, s6 in der hunger twinget.

V. 1857-65

The above excerpt is particularly significant since it not only explicitly identifies M i m e as the source of the lovers’ excessive emotions, but also implies that the basis of their relationship is physical attraction, the consequences of which become evident in the crisis of Part 11.

The series of events from Erec’s arrival in Karnant until his visit at King Arthur’s court in the woods comprises the second block of narration. The narrator abruptly marks the transition from Part I:

sin site er wandeln began. als er nie wiirde der man als6 vertriep der den tac.

V. 2934-36

In Karnant, Erec devotes himself exclusively to the company of his new bride, neglects his knightly duties and falls into disrepute; his aloofness from his court prevents him from realizing that his reputation has plummetted. When Enite informs him of his flagging prestige, his reaction is immediate and puzzling: He commands Enite to prepare for a journey. A close examination of this episode and the subsequent Probefahrt reveals not only the nature and degree of Erec’s change but also an analogous shift in the narrative perspective vis-a-vis Erec.

The most striking difference between Parts I and I1 lies in Erec’s treatment of

Page 6: Shifting Perspectives: The Narrative Strategy in Hartmann's “Erec”

100 Thomas Heine

Enite. Whereas he had been unable to endure the slightest separation from her, now he takes great pains to avoid contact, public or private. More specifically he orders her to ride at a distance in front of him, to eat and sleep separately, and above all to remain silent (“niuwan bi dem libe” v. 3095). Of even greater significance is Erec’s decision to force Enite to lead the horses he captures. Erec expressed surprise and disapproval when Enite was given the task of caring for his horse in Tulmein, but on that occasion her father explained the practical necessity: “uns gebristet der knehte:/von diu tuot siz mit rehte” (v. 350-51). On the Probefahrt, however, Erec goes out of his way to burden Enite with the care of eight horses: A page offers to help Enite, but Erec refuses, claiming: “sie muoz mit ungemacheheben zu diesen ziten” (v. 3593-94).

Throughout the first half of the journey, the narrator repeatedly calls our attention to Enite’s travails (v. 3454-59,5647-49,5110-11). Furthermore, all the characters who witness Enite’s punishment (including the otherwise unsympa- thetic robbers and Count Galoein) marvel at its severity. In fact, while specifically condemning Erec for Enite’s mistreatment (“daz in got velle!” v. 3779, Galoein proposes marriage to Enite so that she might escape her unpleasant situation (v. 3784). The narrator as well explicitly states the impropriety of mistreating women:

d2 von miieze er unsaelic sin (des wiinschet im der wille min) swer den wiben leide tuot, wan es enist mannch noch guot.

V. 5770-73

Although this statement is made at a time when Enite is suffering at the hands of Count Oringles, the narrator’s criticism clearly applies to Erec as well. It is significant that Hartmann’s chief source for this tale, namely ChrCtien’s Erec el Enide, hardly mentions Erec’s harsh treatment of Enite.I4 To be sure, ChrCtien’s Erec also turns the horses over to Enite, but that action elicits criticism neither from the narrator nor from the other characters. We must assume therefore that Hartmann meant to emphasize the significance of the punishment.

On the Probefahrt, Hartmann’s Erec also demonstrates a much greater degree of emotional volatility; the self-control he exercises in Part I appears to be lacking. This change also represents a departure from the portrayal of Erec in Chrktien’s version. Whereas ChrCtien’s protagonist is already reconciled with Enite when they first meet Guivrez,” the anger of Hartmann’s Erec, which grows

Page 7: Shifting Perspectives: The Narrative Strategy in Hartmann's “Erec”

Shifting Perspectives 101

more threatening each time Enite breaks her silence, shows no sign of abating until after their flight from Limors. Nor does Erec restrict his ire to Enite. When Gawein tricks Erec into meeting with King Arthur, he reacts with such indignation that Gawein chides him for his quick temper (v. 5070). In the corresponding episode in Chrttien’s version, Erec merely admits without anger that Gawein has outwitted him (v. 4150).

As is apparent from Erec’s encounter with Gawein, the change in his behavior is not limited to his dealings with Enite. His aloofness from society, already evident in Karnant, becomes more pronounced in the course of Part 11. On three different occasions he tries to avoid contact with court society.I6 His physical withdrawal, moreover, is accompanied by a striking reticence which renders his actions puzzling. His decision to depart from Karnant is a case in point: When Enite tells him about the disparaging rumors he reacts with an enigmatic “ez ist genuoc” (v. 3052) and immediately orders her to put on her best dress and to prepare for a journey. The sudden departure comes as a surprise to his entire court:

d6 enwas aber nieman der sich des mohte verstln wie sin gemiiete was getln.

v. 3077-79

Erec not only offers no explanation, but even tries to give the impression that he is merely going out on a day’s ride (v. 3088-92). Chrttien’s Erec, on the other hand, informs his father of the true nature of the journey and makes arrangements for Enite’s care, should he meet with some mishap away from home (v. 2700-10).

In Chrttien’s version, the reason for Erec’s journey and his treatment of Enite is not an issue. N o one asks about it and it is clear from Erec’s thoughts and actions that he intends to test Enite.I7 Hartmann’s Erec, on the other hand, is called upon several times to explain his behavior. When Count Galoein asks Erec why he is punishing Enite, he gives a laconic and enigmatic answer: “min gemiiete stat als8 (v. 3745). Equally unenlightening are Erec’s explanations of why he cannot stay longer with Guivrez or with King Arthur. In both instances, he formulates his puzzling answers in negative terms. To Guivrez’s offer of hospitality, he responds:

ich enmac niht langer hie bestln niuwan unze morgen vruo und sage iu war umbe ich daz tuo.

Page 8: Shifting Perspectives: The Narrative Strategy in Hartmann's “Erec”

102 Thomas Heine

ich envar nlch gemache niht: swaz ouch mir des geschicht, dar Qf enahte ich niht vil, wan ich dar nlch niht werben wil.

v. 4573-79

And later, he tells Gawein:

ich h l n ze disen ziten gemaches mich bewegen gar.

V. 4977-78

In other words, Erec discloses only what he is not looking for (i.e. gemach) and the purpose of his journey remains a mystery to the other characters.

Erec’s aloofness has serious consequences: It isolates him from his surround- ings, leaving him consistently oblivious to perilous developments around him. In Karnant, for example, he withdraws from his court in order to give all his attention to Enite. As a result, he remains ignorant of the discontent among his knights until Enite calls it to his attention. It is significant that Enite does not share in Erec’s isolation. Although she obviously spends as much time with him as he does with her, she does not lose touch with the developments at court. In fact, here as throughout Part 11, she acts as Erec’s only link with the outside world. A similar situation unfolds at the castle of Count Galoein: When Erec makes Enite sit apart from him, he provides the count with an opportunity to discuss with her a scheme to kill him. Erec learns of the treachery only when Enite dares to come to his side and speak (v. 3993-96).

On four other occasions Enite feels compelled to break her silence in order to warn him of the threatening presence of strangers (v. 3182-88, 3380-83, 4147-49, 4320); the narrator explicitly states that Erec is unaware of the approaching adversaries and that Enite’s warnings saved him from certain defeat (v. 3129-33,4160-65). It is unlikely that we should give credence to the narrator’s explanation that Erec fails to notice Galoein before Enite, because his helmet impedes his perception. After all, the mere suggestion that a knight’s armor prevents him from recognizing an adventure is in some degree ironic.” Furthermore, Enite must warn Erec in situations where the armor is not a factor. Finally, when Erec reestablishes contact with Enite and courtly society in Part 111, he notices dangers before Enite does, even though he is wearing armor. On another level of meaning, however, the narrator’s explanation is an apt description of Erec’s problem: Enclosed in his armor, he is isolated from his surroundings.

Page 9: Shifting Perspectives: The Narrative Strategy in Hartmann's “Erec”

Shifting Perspectives 103

That Erec’s behavior changes in Part I1 is clear; he not only mistreats Enite, he also becomes aloof and, as a result, isolated. What is not clear in Part I1 is Erec’s motivation. Why does he undertake the journey, why does he try to avoid society, and above all, why does he refuse to explain his actions? Although Erec’s reaction to Enite’s disclosure is extreme and puzzling, his portrayal in Part I offers a partial explanation: His insecurity about his reputation would render him particularly sensitive to criticism.’’ News of his fallen reputation would come as even more of a blow since he assumed that he had secured his reputation for life in the tournament (v. 2254-61, see p. 11 for complete quote). Erec’s insecurity, however, accounts only for his immediate reaction; the reasons for his subsequent behavior remain obscure. Were the narrator to comment on Erec’s course of aciion, as he did in Part I, the reader would be spared these questions, but as Kramer observes: “Allein, das Zentralproblem errahrt in den Kommentaren nicht die Akzentuierung, die wir, gemessen an den sonstigen Urteilen, bei Hartmann erwarten konnen” (1 56). The narrator’s peculiar silence on these points represents only one aspect of a radical shift in narrative perspective which corresponds to the change in Erec.

Throughout Part I1 the narrator demonstrates a striking reluctance to penetrate Erec’s silence or to explain Erec’s enigmatic statements; the three-fold perspective (reportage, psycho-narration, and commentary) with respect to Erec in Part I collapses into a single external point of view. That is, the narrator reports Erec’s actions and conversations, but he never reveals what Erec thinks. Again, a comparison with Chrttien’s version is instructive. Following Enite’s fateful confession in Karnant, Chrttien’s narrator continues to monitor Erec’s attitude towards Enite with the result that the reader can witness their gradual reconciliation. For example, when the second band of robbers approaches, the narrator mentions that Erec only pretends not to see them in order to test Enite (v. 2961-62). Later, when they spend their first night in the woods, the narrator reveals that Erec was pleased by Enite’s suggestion that she keep watch while he sleeps (v. 3095). Finally, by the time Enite warns Erec for the fourth time, his threats are much less serious, for he realizes that she loves him and he loves her to the utmost (v. 3770). By contrast, Erec’s attitude towards Enite is unclear in Hartmann’s version. Like the other characters in the story itself, the reader has only Erec’s unusual behavior and obscure statements on which to base his conclusions about Erec’s motivation. Nor do the narrator’s commentaries provide insight. In fact, the only one with any bearing on Erec’s behavior emphasizes the enigma:

Page 10: Shifting Perspectives: The Narrative Strategy in Hartmann's “Erec”

104 Thomas Heime

diz was iedoch ein wunder, daz er durch deheinen zorn im den muot hete erkorn daz er ein s8 schoene wip meit.

V. 3955-58

Although Hartmann’s narrator reveals less about the protagonist than does his French counterpart, he provides much more information about the secondary characters: He gives additional background on the robbers (v. 3299-3309), he quotes a conversation among the second band (v. 3318110); he describes Galoein’s page in greater detail, mentioning, for example, the page’s reaction to Erec’s treatment of Enite (v. 3499-3502); he elaborates on Sir Kay’s motives and personality (v. 4630-64), and even mentions the giants’ reason for abducting Cardoc (v. 5656). Enite also receives fuller treatment from Hartmann’s narrator. Her monologues, which serve as striking counterpoints to Erec’s silence, are longer and more numerous than in the French original. In short, the shift in narrative perspective only applies to Erec. Moreover, the fact that the narrator demonstrates omniscience in other matters suggests that the absence of psycho- narration and commentary with respect to Erec is intentional.” By means of this subtle change in narrative technique, the narrator underscores the effect of Erec’s aloofness, his isolation. That is, in the same way that Erec’s aloofness distances him from the other characters, the narrator’s sudden shift to reportage distances the reader from Erec, revealing no more about Erec’s state of mind than does Erec himself. As a result, Erec’s behavior in Part I1 remains as much of a mystery to the reader as to the other characters in the story.

The reader’s problem is compounded by the fact that Erec’s course of action reflects no well-defined plan. Some commentators have concluded that the purpose of the Probefahrt is to test Enite’s faithfulness.21 Enite does in fact rebuff the advances of Galoein and Oringles, but there is no indication that this is part of Erec’s plan. On the contrary, the trials result from his aloofness and isolation rather than by design; furthermore, in the case of Galoein, Erec even grows more angry by Enite’s show of fidelity. Other commentators see in the Probefahrt an opportunity for Erec to prove his worthiness as a knight to Enite and society.” This explanation is likewise inadequate. Erec behaves in a manner that is decidedly uncourtly; he makes no attempt to redeem himself at this point in the tale, and his aloofness renders him even less capable of performing his knightly duties. In short, Erec’s behavior in Part I1 is confused, his comments are obscure, and his thoughts are never disclosed.

Page 11: Shifting Perspectives: The Narrative Strategy in Hartmann's “Erec”

Shijting Perspectives 105

111

Erec’s behavior and the narrative perspective both undergo major changes following Erec’s visit at King Arthur’s court in the woods. The structural importance of this episode was first pointed out by Hugo Kuhn, who concluded that Erec’s arrival at the court, the so-called Zwischeneinkehr, represents the point about which “der doppelte Kursus” revolves.23 Whereas Kuhn sees the significance primarily in terms of the structure of the work, Peter Wapnewski notes that the degree to which Erec’s wound heals at this court symbolizes the extent of his spiritual development:

Der Artushof kann (die Wunde) lindern, aber nicht heilen: denn er kann Ereks Fehl nicht heilen; und die Wunde schliesst sich erst in dem Aufenthalt auf dem Schloss des Guivrez, nachdem Erek iiberwunden hat und neu mit Enite vereint ist . . .24

This is both useful and misleading. On one hand, Wapnewski rightly suggests that Erec’s development in Part 111 is gradual. Erec’s contact with King Arthur’s court affects him, but the change is not nearly as abrupt as was the transition from Part I to Part 11. Erec’s wound, symbolizing his strained relations with Enite, represents, however, only one aspect of Erec’s condition. A close examination of the subsequent episodes in light of the foregoing discussion of Part I1 yields a much more precise description of Erec’s development and shows that it continues beyond his stay at Guivrez’s castle.

In the first adventure following the Zwischeneinkehr, Erec rescues a young knight, Cardoc, from the cruel treatment of two giants. Wapnewski compares this episode with Erec’s defeat of the robbers in Part I1 and concludes: “Wieder Sieg iiber rohe Gewalt, aber diesmal nicht in eigener Sache, sondern zum Schutze der Gequalten und Wehrlosen” (50). Again, Wapnewski’s observation does not do full justice to the extent of Erec’s change. For the first time since Karnant, Erec does not need Enite to call his attention to the presence of danger. He himself recognizes the cries of a damsel in distress and actively pursues the adventure.” Erec’s compassion for Cardoc and his distraught lady, which i s emphasized by the narrator (v. 5537, 5498-5500), also represents the reappear- ance of an aspect of Erec’s personality conspicuously absent in the first part ofthe Probefahrt. Whereas Erec showed concern for Enite in Tulmein, his treatment of her in the earlier episodes of the journey is callous. When he sees the cruel

Page 12: Shifting Perspectives: The Narrative Strategy in Hartmann's “Erec”

106 Thomas Heine

punishment of Cardoc, however, “nii bewegete ritters smerze/s6 s&re sin herze/daz er bi im 2: waere geslagenh er inz haete vertragen” (v. 5430-33).

The references to Erec’s compassion mark a significant change in the narrative perspective as well. As Erec reestablishes contact with his surround- ings, the narrator provides even more insights for the reader into the protagonist’s emotions and inner qualities. The reintroduction of psycho- narration with respect to Erec brings with it clarity concerning the motivation behind his conversation with the giants (v. 5458-59) and later with Cardoc (v. 5664). It is important to note how closely the narrator’s change parallels Erec’s own development. That the reader learns nothing of Erec’s feelings for Enite in this episode reflects the fact that Erec has not yet reconciled himself with her, nor does he demonstrate an understanding of the failings to which he later admits in the tale. In Chrktien’s version, Erec leaves Cardoc in haste, fearing that Enite might come to some harm in his absence (v. 4585-89). In Hartmann’s version, by contrast, we find no indication, either in the narrator’s comments or in Erec’s behavior, of any change in Erec’s attitude towards Enite. The Cardoc episode thus represents only an intermediate stage in Erec’s gradual development.

In the next adventure, Erec’s relationship with Enite shows marked im- provement. After Erec collapses from exhaustion and appears to be dead, Enite finds herself in a precarious situation: Count Oringles takes her into his protection and then tries to force her to marry him. This new crisis sets the stage for Erec’s sudden “resurrection” and his defense of Enite. The circumstances of Erec’s reawakening deserve commentary, for they suggest that he has overcome the isolation in which he found himself in Part 11. As the result of Enite’s cry for help, Erec begins to hear and see the danger threatening him and his lady:

er lac in einem twalme und erschihte von ir galme als der d l wirt erwecket, er vuor Of von der bare in vremder geblre und begunde mit den ougen sehen.

V. 6594-6600

als si in d6 nande zehant er si erkande und vernam wol daz si waere in etelicher swaere

V. 6608-1 1

Page 13: Shifting Perspectives: The Narrative Strategy in Hartmann's “Erec”

Shifting Perspectives 107

The sequence of events in this episode is very similar to those in Part 11: Erec is unaware of the danger until Enite literally calls it to his attention; he then responds by the act of vanquishing the enemy. On this occasion, however, Enite’s warning results in reconciliation:

er druhte si an sin bruste, vil dicke er si kuste vol minneclkhen und bat die tugentrichen daz si wolde vergeben als ungeselleclichez leben unde manege arbeit die si Gf der verte leit.

V. 6792-99

Their new relationship makes explicit what is implicit throughout Part 11, namely that Erec and Enite need each other in mutual degree: He saves her from the count, while she in turn leads him out of Limors.

The change in Erec is once again accompanied by a shift in the narrative perspective. The narrator describes the reconciliation both in terms of outward actions (quoted above) and from the point of view of the protagonist:

durch daz diu spaehe wart genommen, des ist er an ein ende komen und westez rehte l n e win. ez was durch versuochen getln ob si im waere ein rehtz wip.

V. 6778-82

The two changes constitute a significant conjunction of figural psychology and authorial stance: The narrator provides the first glimpse into Erec’s motivation at the moment Erec reestablishes verbal contact with Enite. As in Part 11, the reader’s relative distance from Erec corresponds to Erec’s degree of isolation. During Erec’s estrangement, the narrator portrays him from an external point of view. Consequently, the reader can only guess what Erec is thinking. As Erec begins to overcome his isolation, the narrator brings the reader closer to the protagonist by means of psycho-narration. In this way, the reader shares in Enite’s renewed intimacy with Erec.

The full extent of Erec’s change in Limors becomes evident in his second meeting with Guivrez. In contrast to their first confrontation, now Erec hears and sees Guivrez and his men from a distance (v. 6872-77) and even calls Enite’s

Page 14: Shifting Perspectives: The Narrative Strategy in Hartmann's “Erec”

108 Thomas Heine ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~

attention to their approach. Erec’s greater awareness, however, is not a sign of his independence from Enite, which could lead to renewed aloofness; when he succumbs to Guivrez, she must rush to his side and save him as she did in Part 11. Rather than upbraid Enite for intruding, Erec now concedes his folly: “swelh man toerliche tuot,/wirts im gelBnet, daz ist guot” (v. 7010-11).

Erec’s reaction to the hospitality of Guivrez also reflects his development. During the first half on the Probefahrt, Erec remains aloof from courtly life, and Guivrez and King Arthur succeed in detaining him for only one night at their respective courts. Following his second meeting with Guivrez, Erec accepts his invitation and spends two weeks “ze vollem gemache” (v. 7120) at Guivrez’s castle. His entry into society coincides with a complete reunion with Enite (v. 7091-7101). Erec’s extended stay with Guivrez, however, does not indicate a return to his earlier self-indulgence. Although he appreciates the amenities of courtly life, as soon as he recovers from his wounds, he begins to grow restless, longing to be on the road to adventure as he was in Part 11:

daz kam von dem muote daz im dehein werltsache enwas vor dem gemache d l er ritterschaft vant und d l er mit siner hant die sere muoste urborn. diz leben hdte er erkorn.

V. 7251-57

But the most striking development in this episode lies in Erec’s growing self- awareness and self-criticism. In Part I the psycho-narration reveals in him a certain degree of introspection and humility, but on the Probefuhrt this perspective falls away and with it any indication of Erec’s inner qualities and state of mind. In the course of Part 111, the reader once again has the opportunity to learn of Erec’s self-image. As in other aspects of Erec’s behavior, the change here is gradual. The first instance is the conversation with Cardoc, in which Erec claims that a knight can innocently fall into disgrace:

j 2 enwirt es nieman erldn swer sB manheit iieben wil, in enbringe geschiht df daz zil daz er sich schame lihte muoz: dar ndch wirt im es buoz. wie dicke ich wirs gehandelt bin!

V. 5669-74

Page 15: Shifting Perspectives: The Narrative Strategy in Hartmann's “Erec”

Shijting Perspectives 109 _ _ _ _ ~ ~~~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~

By implication, Erec considers himself to be guiltless. Although later on their flight from Oringles’ court Erec asks Enite forgiveness for having subjected her to great hardships, he still implies that she was partly responsible: “ez was durch versuochen ge thdob si im waere ein rehtez wip” (v. 6781-82). That is, he apologizes for the severity of the test (“ungeselleclichez leben und manege arbeit”) but not for the test itself, which he seems to think she warranted. By contrast, Erec’s apology to Guivrez lacks any such qualification. Furthermore, though Erec does not refer specifically to his behavior on the Probefahrt, his self- criticism reflects a growing awareness of his fundamental fault throughout Part 11, namely, his isolation:

sit daz ich tumber man ie von tumpheit muot gewan so gr6zer unmlze daz ich vremder strlze eine wolde waken unde vor behalten s6 manegem guoten knehte, d6 tltet ir mir rehte. min buoze wart ze kleine, d6 ich alters eine iuwer alle erer wolde hln.

v. 7012-21 (my emphasis)

It is significant that the reader’s insights into Erec’s self-opinion come directly from Erec and not from the narrator. In contrast to his behavior in Part I, Erec no longer keeps his criticism to himself, but rather admits his failings openly. To be sure, the narrator alludes to the precariousness of Erec’s state of aloofness by comparing him to a shipwrecked man “fif einem brete” (v. 7065), but this comment follows and merely emphasizes what Erec has already admitted. In fact, throughout Part 111, the narrator’s comments never anticipate Erec’s development. In the Cardoc episode, for example, the narrator frequently cites Erec’s thoughts and emotions, but only mentions Erec’s attitude towards Enite when Erec himself later broaches the subject. The narrator’s stance vis-bvis Erec thus resembles his stance in both Part I and 11. On the one hand, he no longer stands outside the protagonist; as in Part I, he often employs psycho- narration. On the other hand, the narrator demonstrates a degree of restraint reminiscent of Part 11: He never discloses more about the central problem than Erec himself is able or willing to admit. As a result, the reader’s understanding of Erec’s behavior on the Probefahrt grows as Erec becomes more willing to discuss

Page 16: Shifting Perspectives: The Narrative Strategy in Hartmann's “Erec”

110 Thomas Heine

it. In this way, the reader not only witnesses but also experiences directly the consequences of Erec’s renewed contact with the outside world.

Erec’s development as “der vollkommene hofische Ritter” reaches a climax, as Hugo Kuhn first noted, in the final adventure, the joie de la curt.26 His compassion, which had reemerged in the Cardoc episode culminates in the solace he brings to the eighty mourning widows at Ivrain’s court. Furthermore, numerous parallels between Mabonagrin’s isolation and Erec’s earlier state suggest that, in defeating the red knight, Erec achieves a personal triumph over his own previous shortcoming^.^^ Like Erec, Mabonagrin had withdrawn from society as a young knight in order to devote himself exclusively to his new wife; Gawein’s criticism of Erec in Iwein would seem to apply equally to Mabona- grin’s behavior: “er minnete ze Commentators have failed to notice, however, that the similarities between Mabonagrin and Erec extend beyond their respective love relationships. Mabonagrin’s belligerent and volatile manner, resembling Erec’s churlish reactions to Gawein and Guivrez, startles Erec even though he had entered the garden expecting a duel: “herre, wes scheltet ir mich?” (v. 9031). Furthermore, as was the case with Erec, Mabonagrin’s aloofness is puzzling and requires an explanation. Thus, following the duel Erec asks:

nil weder habet ir disen muot von iemannes gebote? oder welt irs 18n haben von gote? oder sult ir immer sinne sin?

V. 9439-42

Said another way, just as Erec baffles others by his unusual behavior on the Probefahrt, so now he finds himself confronted by a virtual double whose motives seem equally obscure. Different from Erec, however, Mabonagrin finally offers a detailed defense of his stay in the garden and thus provides insight into the state of mind responsible for the enigma.

In the same way that Erec originally blames Enite for his troubles, Mabonagrin explains that it was his lady who wanted to live in the garden; he excuses himself for complying with her wishes:

von diu swenne ich niht entaete gerne swie si baete, dS missetaete ich an mir michels harter dan an ir.

V. 9528-32

Page 17: Shifting Perspectives: The Narrative Strategy in Hartmann's “Erec”

Shifting Perspectives 111

Although he claims that her possessiveness is reponsible for their isolation (v. 9552-55), it is clear in his challenge to Erec that it is he who jealously guards against intruders:

er sprach: ‘valschaere, nti sage an, wer hiez iuch tier vrouwen s6 nihen gin?

V. 9027-28

db dunket ir mich der vrouwen ze balt’ v. 9032

Mabonagrin’s description of his love relationship exhibits similar contradic- tions. He would have Erec believe that he and his lady have achieved complete harmony in their desires (v. 9508-27), but their dissimilar reactions to his defeat belie any such unity. Mabonagrin does not share his lady’s disappointment (“geladen mit herzenscre”); indeed, he expresses the relief and gratitude of one freed from bondage:

. . . sit mich von disem bande h i t erloeset iuwer hant got der hit iuc,h her gesant. hiute 1st mines kumbers zil.

V. 9585-88

Mabonagrin’s claims of innocence are also at odds with his bizarre practice of displaying his trophies, the heads of his victims. For someone who complains of his unpleasant task, he has fulfilled his duty with gruesome thoroughness.

Although Mabonagrin’s self-defense fails to explain his behavior, the contradictions and inconsistencies are themselves revealing. The mental confu- sion implicit in his narrative demonstrates the befuddling effect of minne, of which there are numerous examples in the text. Count Galoein, for example, is introduced as “biderbe unde guot” (v. 3688), but when he sees Enite “d6 tete im untriuwe kunt/diu kreftige minne/und benam im rehte sinne” (v. 3691-93). The narrator explicitly attributes to “der minne maht” (v. 6340) the alienation of Count Oringles from his court (v. 6529-33); love has led him “ze gr6zer torheite/und iif gr8zen ungevuoc” (v. 65 19-20). Galoein, Oringles, and Mabo- nagrin, suffering from the domination of minne, thus follow a course of action that is both confused and counter-productive: In their efforts to woo Enite, Galoein and Oringles resort to threats and abuse; Mabonagrin’s repeated duels, meant to preserve conjugal harmony, have the opposite effect. In Erec’s case, the

Page 18: Shifting Perspectives: The Narrative Strategy in Hartmann's “Erec”

112 Thomas Heine ~ ~~

confusion resulting from the power of minne is not immediately obvious on the Probefahrt precisely because neither he nor the narrator provides any insight into his state of mind. The confusion, however, is implicit in Erec’s actions. Lacking any well-defined purpose, they exacerbate rather than resolve the problem.

The coincidence of confusion and isolation in all four of these characters suggests that both states are aspects of the same condition. Thus, Erec resolves both problems at the same time: As he overcomes his isolation, he begins to view his situation differently, demonstrating greater self-awareness and self-criticism. On the eve of his confrontation with Mabonagrin, for example, Erec alludes for the first time to his earlier confusion:

ich weste wol, der saelden wec gienge in der werlde eteswl, rehte enweste ich aber wl, wan daz ich in suochende reit in grBzer ungewisheit, unz daz ich nii funden hln.

v. 8521-26 (my emphasis)

And his advice to Mabonagrin after the duel shows an even greater understand- ing of the source of their problem:

und swie deheiner slahte guot s6 s&re ringe den muot s6 da liep b? liebe lit als ir und iuwer wip sit, s6 sol man waerlichen den wiben doch entwichen zetelicher stunde.

V. 9418-24

wan bi den liuten ist s6 guot. v. 9438

Significantly, Erec implies that the responsibility for a healthy relationship lies with the knight, not the lady. He thus exonerates Mabonagrin’s mate (and by implication, Enite) from any w r ~ n g d o i n g . ~ ~ The final episode of the tale likewise focuses on the individual accomplishments of Erec, while the role of Enite goes practically unmentioned. For example, the townspeople give Erec credit for the

Page 19: Shifting Perspectives: The Narrative Strategy in Hartmann's “Erec”

Shifting Perspective.v 113

joy in Brandigan. Furthermore, when he brings the beautiful widows to Kardigan, King Arthur singles him out for more praise (v. 9945-48). Indeed, in his new relationship with society, Erec makes his presence felt throughout the world:

sprechet ir wie daz mohte sin? von diu schein der lip nQ dg, s6 was sin lop anderswg. als6 was sin diu werlt vol.

V. 10049-52

Since the source of the lovers’ problem in Part I1 lay with Erec, it is not surprising that he should benefit most from its resolution. Erec’s prominence in the final episodes is also mirrored in the narrative perspective. It is Erec, and not the narrator, who reveals the significance of the story. The explicit moral, offered by the narrator in the tale’s closing lines, merely summarizes the conclusions that Erec has already reached and shared with the other characters.

The present examination of Hartmann’s Erec has concentrated on tracing related changes in the protagonist and in the narrative perspective. The opening episodes reveal the broad outlines of Erec’s personality, which undergoes a radical change following his estrangement from his court and Enite. Through- out Part I1 the reasons for Erec’s unusual behavior remain obscure as his aloofness precludes any insight into his motivation. It becomes clear in the course of Part 111, however, that Erec suffers from the isolation and confusion resulting from the power of love. He gradually comes to realize that his devotion to Enite must be balanced by an active role in society. By manipulating our “distance” from Erec, the narrator subtly draws us into this development. Initially, the narrator’s use of psycho-narration and commentary provides access to Erec’s inner qualities and reflections; our familiarity with the protagonist in Part I parallels his unproblematic relationship with society. When Erec withdraws from society in Part 11, the narrator’s stance shifts accordingly; we become estranged from Erec as well. No longer privy to Erec’s thoughts, we can only view his puzzling behavior as it appears to the other characters in the tale. Our distance from Erec diminishes as he reestablishes contact with society. The narrator penetrates Erec’s exterior, while the protagonist himself grows more talkative and more willing to discuss the nature of his difficulties. And yet the lesson to be learned from Erec’s experiences becomes explicit only when he himself expresses it to Mabonagrin. Thus Hartmann places us in a situation

Page 20: Shifting Perspectives: The Narrative Strategy in Hartmann's “Erec”

114 Thomas Heine

analogous to that of his protagonist: Erec’s insights become our insights. Like Erec, we proceed from ignorance to a new understanding of the knight’s proper relationship to society.

NOTES * I would like to express my thanks t o Professors Frank G. Ryder and William

McDonald for their criticisms and suggestions in the development of this paper. 1. See: Hans-Peter Kramer, Erzahlbernerkungen und Erzahlkommentare in Chrestiens

und Hartmanns ‘Erec’ und ‘Iwein’ (Goppingen, 1971). p. 129: “Das eigentliche Verwendungsfeld der Erzahlbemerkungen [ist] nicht die Kommentierung der Zentralproblematik;” Ray Boggs, “Hartmann’s Erec,” in Innovation in Medieval Literature, ed. Douglas Radcliff-Umstead (Pittsburgh, 1971), p. 56: ”Neither the poet nor Erec offer any explanation for the reason behind Erec’s decision to command Enite to precede him and not to speak to him;” Ursula Kuttner, Das Erzuhlen des Erzahlten: Eine Studie zum Stil in Hartmanns ‘Erec’ und ‘Iwein’ (Bonn, 1978). Unlike Kramer and Boggs, Kuttner does not explicitly call attention to this problem; however, in what is otherwise a very detailed examination of the narrator, she cites no examples of narrative commentary with respect to Erec on the Probefahrt.

2. Numerous commentators have found fault with Enite on the basis of their conception of ideal courtly behavior. For examples, see: Helmut de Boor, Geschichte der deutschen Literatur (Munich, 1953), 11, 71; Petrus Tax, “Studium zum Symbolischen in Hartmanns Erec,” Zeitschrift fur deutsche Philologie, 82 (1963), p. 43; Ernst Scheunemann, Artushof und Abenteuer (Breslau, 1937), p. 58.

3. Hans Blosen, “Noch einmal: Zu Enites Schuld in Hartmans Erec. Mit Ausblicken auf ChrCtiens und des Mabinogi von Gereint, Orbis Litterarum, 31 (1976), 81-109. Blosen’s thesis turns on the assumed existence of a German version of the Celtic Gereint (p. 82).

4. In emphasizing Enite’s admission of guilt, Thomas Cramer comes to quite different conclusions from those of Kurt Ruh, who stresses Erec’s apology. Thomas Cramer, “Soziale Motivation in der Schuld-Siihne-Problematik in Hartmanns Erec, “Eu- phorion, 66, (1972), 97-1 12; Kurt Ruh, Hojkche Epik des deutschen Mittelalters (Berlin, 1967), pp. 112-137.

5. Hugo Kuhn, “Erec”, in Hartmann von Aue, ed. Hugo Kuhn and Christoph Cormeau (Darmstadt, 1973), pp. 17-48; Peter Wapnewski, Hartmann von Aue, Sammlung Metzler, 17 (Stuttgart, 1976), pp. 49-52; Ruh, pp. 113-32.

6. Kuhn, p. 13. 7. Wapnewski, p. 46; Ruh, p. 123; cf. Gustav Ehrismann, Geschichte der deutschen

Literatur bis zum Ausgang des Mittelalters (Munich, 1965), 11, 2/I, 162. 8. This formulation should not be confused with Wapnewski’s discussion of a

“Dreisatz-Struktur” in Erec (50). Wapnewski’s term does not refer to the rnetastruc- ture, but rather to the inner organization of the two series of adventures.

9. Boggs, p. 51. 10. All quotations and references to Erec are taken from Hartmann von Aue, Erec, ed.

Albert Leitzmann, 4th edition by Ludwig Wolff (Tiibingen, 1967). 11. My application of this term, which will become clear in the course of the essay, is

somewhat broader than that of Dorrit Cohn, who coined and discussed “psycho-

Page 21: Shifting Perspectives: The Narrative Strategy in Hartmann's “Erec”

Shifting Perspectives 115

narration” at length in reference to post-Medieval novels. See Ms. Cohn’s Transparent Minds (Princeton, 1978), pp. 21-57.

12. Boggs describes Erec’s behavior merely as “youthful brashness” (54). 13. For a detailed discussion of narrative irony in Erec, see Kuttner, pp. 33, 232, et

passim. 14. Concerning Hartmann’s possible sources, see Hendricus Sparnaay, Hartmann von

Aue. Srudien zu einer Biographie (Halle, 1933), I, 121; also, Wapnewski, pp. 45-47. 15. All references and quotations to Erec et Enide are from Chrttien’s Erec et Enide, ed.

Wendeln Foerster (Halle, 1909). Although the formal reconciliation does not take place until after Limors, Chrttien’s Erec recognizes Enide’s love much earlier: . . . . cil la menace Mes n’a talant que ma1 li face; Qu’il aparqoit et consoist bien Qu’lle I’aimme sor tote rien, et il li tant que plus ne puet.

V. 3765-69 16. Erec chooses to stay at an inn rather than at Galoein’s court (v. 3644-45); despite

Guivrez’s entreaties, Erec spends only one night a t his castle (v. 4625-27); finally, Gawein has to trick Erec into visiting King Arthur in the woods (v. 5026-31).

17. For example, in order to test Enide, Chrktien’s Erec pretends not to notice the approach of the second band of robbers (v. 2960-62).

18. Kuttner, p. 32: “Dadurch dass als Erklarung die reale Situation angefuhrt wird, kommt der leicht ironische Begleitton zustande: Der so hoch gestellte Ritter.. . ist eben durch die ’isenwaete’ (4158) in den natiirlichen Fahigkeiten des Horens unddes Sehens behindert.”

19. Cf. Frank Tobin, “Hartmann’s Erec: The Perils of Young Love,” Seminar, XIV (1978), p. 10. Tobin describes but does not account for Erec’s “irritability.”

20. Kuttner claims that the omniscient narrator occasionally feigns ignorance for comic effect (214).

21. E.g. Cramer, pp. 104-5; Tax, pp. 30 and 45; Antonin HrubL, “Moralphilosophie und Moraltheologie in Hartmanns Erec”, in The Epic in Medieval Society, ed. Harald Scholler (Tubingen, 1977), pp. 193-213.

22. Tobin, pp. 10-11; Ruh. p. 128. 23. Kuhn, p. 31. 24. Wapnewski, p. 50. 25. Kuhn describes Erec’s change somewhat differently: “In Teil I lasst sich Erec seinen

Weg vom Schicksal abzwingen - in Teil I1 nimmt er den gleichen Weg bewusst auf sich, ja fordert ihn freiwillig aus” (43).

26. Kuhn, pp. 44-46. 27. Tobin, p. 14. 28. Hartmann von Aue, Zwein, ed. G. F. Beneke and K. Lachmann, 6th edition by

29. For a thorough discussion of Enite’s innocence, see Tobin, pp. 3-10. Ludwig Wolff (Berlin, 1962), v. 2798.

Thomas Heine. Born 1953. Ph. D. Visiting Assistant Professor, University of California, Santa Cruz. Has published articles on Kleist and Lenz.