Prelims Essays for German
2. In Bertolt Brecht and Kurt Weill’s opera Aufstieg und Fall der Stadt Mahagonny (1930),
which I will henceforth refer to as Mahagonny, the audience is enticed towards critical
thinking about the modern world in which they live, as opposed to a ‘modern world' which is
depicted in the work. Brecht’s libretto also depicts a society with a loss of identity, both
individual and social, a loss of significant interpersonal relationships, and with capital as a
source of temporary, although unjust, authority.
Although Brecht only articulated his thoughts on ‘Epic Theatre’ and the
‘Verfremdungseffekt’ in the late 1930s, the roots of such ideas can be seen in Mahagonny, as
the use of an operatic form may distance the audience from the action occurring on stage by
presenting dialogue through an unusual medium, singing, encouraging – as intended by Epic
Theatre – the audience to engage rationally, rather than merely with enjoyment, towards the
work. Such an effect is also brought about by the supposed contrast between Brecht’s libretto
and the content of the dialogue, such as in the ‘Alabama Song’, in which Jenny’s slurring,
drawn-out notes contrast starkly with the implication that they are sex workers proposed in
the song. The ‘Alabama Song’ is indeed an interesting point to mull; Elisabeth Hauptmann
was responsible for the slightly semantically incorrect English in Mahagonny, and arguably
hearing English engages critical thinking, as those in a German-speaking audience must quite
literally think about what is being said. Alternatively, Goehr’s suggestion that Mahagonny is
a form of culinary opera may be made truer by use of English; a German speaker could sit
back and enjoy the show rather than exerting themselves with Hauptmann’s English. Perhaps,
then, Goehr is indeed correct: that Mahagonny is indeed a form of culinary opera, albeit one
which combines the purposes of education and entertainment – so even if the German speaker
hesitates to try and translate the English, they can still experience an understanding that the
action on the stage is not real due to the code-switching and operatic form, and think
critically therefore about the characters without being emotionally involved, albeit whilst still
enjoying the experience, allowing the audience to have a foundation on which they can
contemplate their own lives in the modern world.
Mahagonny induces contemplation of the modern world with such a foundation firstly in how
alienated the individual is due to capital. Jimmy is depicted as being between denying any
desire to be a ‘Mensch’, which is proposed to him as involving a desire to fish, drink, and sit
around in peace, and then also an equivalent sympathy with being a ‘Mensch’, when he
protests to Begbick that Mahagonny would make nobody happy. In effect, Jimmy has an
insecure identity, which I would argue is brought on by how he is trapped still in his identity
as a worker who earns money by felling trees – his seven years in Alaska doing so are
referenced frequently in his scenes – and is dissatisfied with what money can offer him at
Mahagonny after having earned money specifically for that end. In effect, Mahagonny is a
betrayal of his identity as a lumberjack, as it makes his years working meaningless. Equally,
in this city dominated by money – Begbick claims ‘Mahagonny’ means ‘Çity of Nets’, as if
one can catch men for their money in it – has no telephone, anywhere. So, this city of capital
is in fact alienated from the rest of the world, and those who go to Mahagonny have no means
of calling relatives, or even calling each other: their social connections are cut off by
choosing to go to Mahagonny. Furthermore, there is a consistent confusion of sex and love in
the opera, best portrayed by scenes involving the sex workers. Jenny’s relationship to Jimmy
is shown to be ambiguous, as she claims to love him often, yet equally is called up at the trial
, as a ‘Geschädigte’ in a case involving capital, and the price to be with her is negotiated when
Jimmy and the other lumberjacks arrive in Mahagonny. In a later scene, residents of
Mahagonny urge each other to be quick with the sex workers, as ‘Liebe...ist doch an Zeit
nicht gebunden’. The confusion of sex and love denigrates the unique interpersonal
relationship of love for sold sex, and so the spending of money becomes more important than
interpersonal relationships. So, overall, in a city dominated by capital, the individual is
alienated from others, and money is a domineering force in the world according to
Mahagonny.
Also, audiences may be able to critique the role of capital in Mahagonny as a source of unjust
and temporary authority. In the first scene, when Moses and Fatty are stuck in chiasmatic
repetition of one another’s lines as they decide whether or not they can progress forward,
Begbick breaks the cycle by suggesting that all three stay there and found Mahagonny –
making the seeking of capital a means of certainty and overriding indecision. ‘Moses’ as the
chosen speech prefix also has some significance to capital; Murphy argues that Moses is
portrayed as a representation of Western religion, carrying out the will of Begbick, and with
the Biblical name ‘Moses’ at the front and centre of his portrayal, the link is clear, and
Begbick must be considered a source of capitalist authority, as she suggests the founding of
Mahagonny. In the final few scenes, the injustice of capital as authority is shown, as Jimmy is
executed for not being able to pay off a bill, and the collapse of Mahagonny comes soon
after, in which people parade with signs advocating for contradictory proposals, such as the
‘natürliche Ordnung / Unordnung der Dinge’, making money a dominating force in the
society portrayed by Mahagonny, albeit an unstable one which eventually fails and leads to
social discord.
In conclusion, although I disagree that an audience can relate emotionally to the action on the
stage to consider Mahagonny a representation of the ‘modern world’, it is arguably instead
what Adorno called a ‘projection’. The world of Mahagonny is indeed dominated by money,
which domineers over religion, the individual, and sexual relationships, and an audience may
feel as if they can be simultaneously entertained enough and educated enough by the work to
recognise that Brecht and Weill portray certain aspects of the society in which they live,
which they may indeed contemplate further.
5. In Frank Wedekind’s Frühlings Erwachen (1891) and Arthur Schnitzler’s Liebelei (1894),
characters are indeed portrayed as victims of their society, although the term ‘helpless’ may
be too far; one cannot forget the importance of individual responsibility.
In Frühlings Erwachen, Wedekind portrays children – or rather adolescents – as being
disadvantaged by the society in which they live. Firstly, it is a consistent worry of Moritz’
that he will not be ‘promoviert’ and allowed to carry on to the next year of school due to the
limited number of seats within a classroom. This would have likely been a worry of many
