Out of Ruin: Goethe’s Poetic Realism as a Method of Constructive Inquiry 305 Out of Ruin: Goethe’s Poetic Realism as a Method of Constructive Inquiry Christian P� Weber Florida State University Abstract: This contribution defines poetic realism as a specific method of inquiry and representation rather than understanding it in terms of poetic genre or literary style. Goethe’s work engages with the invisible formative forces and transitions in organic nature and the deforming ruination of ancient artwork by natural and historical forces, showing that they exceed the capacity of observation and require the complement of the constructive or reconstructive imagination� In this context, poetic realism performs a series of oscillations between the observed object and the imagining/ thinking subject in a joint venture process of (re)constructing a virtual object in the mind. This epistemological mode of reflection and the dynamic versatility of the resulting schematic phenomena are essentially poetic and therefore demand poetic means of representation. Goethe’s poem “Der Wandrer,” his scientific discovery of a metamorphosis of plants and its poetic rendition in the elegy “Die Metamorphose der Pflanzen” (1798), and finally his reflections on the representation of the human body in ancient statues are introduced as supreme achievements of poetic realism� Keywords: Realism, poetic realism, Goethe, “Der Wandrer,” metamorphosis of plants, “Die Metamorphose der Pflanzen,” antiquity, statues, Winckelmann Sometimes poetry is deceiving, and its fiction mistaken for reality. This misunderstanding happened to Felix Mendelssohn, who claimed to have discovered the original location of Goethe’s poem “Der Wandrer” in a letter to Goethe’s friend Zelter from Naples in 1831� Mendelssohn assumed that Goethe had composed this poem during his sojourn in Italy between 1786 and 1788 in the de- 306 Christian P� Weber scribed set of a landscape littered with ruins, located only a few miles away from the ancient town of Cumae. In fact, the poem had been written much earlier in the early 1770s (Eibl’s commentary in FA 1: 935). This curious incident is instructive by illustrating what “poetic realism” does not mean, namely an imitative representation of a real event, thing, person, time or place with the objective of verisimilitude; at the same time, however, Mendelssohn’s misidentification is useful because it refers to “Der Wandrer,” a poem that could be called the primal scene of Goethe’s poetic realism. I will return to it later to explore the central antagonism between nature and art as the generative core of this method and to survey some of its individual implications and effects as illustrated by this early poetic example� But first, general remarks are in order to clarify and justify the introduction of the concept of poetic realism to Goethe scholarship and what it contributes to the Realism debate. Goethe, although a self-declared “arch-realist,” is commonly not associated with literary realism. His major literary works, except perhaps Die Wahlverwandtschaften , show a too-high degree of abstraction, too little direct engagement with social issues, and too many obvious markers of fictionalization to be counted among the canonical texts of this genre or style. Nonetheless, it could be argued, based on the conception of poetic realism promoted here, that these literary works belong to realism as much as any of the canonical European novels of the nineteenth century. But my contribution will not pursue this argument� To the contrary, rather than a literary genre or style, I conceive of poetic realism as a specific method of inquiry and representation that transgresses the boundaries commonly drawn between scientific and poetic modes� Realism for Goethe, I argue, is grounded in the experience of something objective and real, which begins with the gift of life: “Das Höchste was wir von Gott und der Natur erhalten haben ist das Leben, die rotierende Bewegung der Monas um sich selbst, welche weder Rast noch Ruhe kennt” (“<Aphoristisch>”; FA 24: 531). Beyond this primordial motion, “life” becomes real only in a second step when the “monad” manifests itself in the “surroundings of the external world” and realizes itself in acts of engagement. 1 Realism in general then means the effort to come to terms about the process of how life is realizing itself: “Über dieses Erlebte können wir, obgleich Anlage, Aufmerksamkeit und Glück dazu gehört, in uns selbst klar werden” (“<Aphoristisch>”; FA 24: 531). As we shall see in the following, Goethe’s intuitive genius, his attentive discipline, and last but not least also the good fortune to be in the right place at the right time while encountering supportive people contribute to what I call his method of poetic realism� Out of Ruin: Goethe’s Poetic Realism as a Method of Constructive Inquiry 307 There exist, of course, self-descriptions of his realist methods of inquiry under headings such as “zarte Empirie” or “gegenständliches Denken.” Both terms offer valuable insights to Goethe’s theory and practice of cognition but highlight only certain, though crucial, aspects of his methodological engagement with the real. The term “delicate empiricism” stresses the priority of the object and the gentle attitude with which the observer should approach his/ her subject matter; if the observer makes him-/ herself transparent, the object will be able to impress on him/ her its qualities so that the subject ideally becomes identical with the object. 2 We shall later identify the place of this synchronization within the larger complex of poetic realism� Another, similar key element of poetic realism is the concept of “gegenständliches Denken” (objective thinking), a term coined by the psychologist Johann Christian Heinroth to characterize Goethe, “den Schöpfer des echten wissenschaftlichen Verfahrens” (FA 24: 1124), and which the recipient recites approvingly in his Hefte zur Morphologie : “daß mein Denken sich von den Gegenständen nicht sondere, daß die Elemente der Gegenstände, die Anschauungen in dasselbe eingehen und von ihm auf das innigste durchdrungen werden, daß mein Anschauen selbst ein Denken, mein Denken ein Anschauen sei…” (FA 24: 595)� Again, the emphasis is on a cognitive process that is directed by the perceived object rather than the observer’s subjective imagination� Nonetheless, the imagination remains in play once it has been programmed by empirical observation to a point of saturation: “[Ich] fand daß mein ganzes Verfahren auf dem Ableiten beruhe; ich raste nicht bis ich einen prägnanten Punkt finde, von dem sich vieles ableiten läßt, oder vielmehr der vieles freiwillig aus sich hervorbringt und mir entgegen trägt, da ich denn im Bemühen und Empfangen vorsichtig und treu zu Werke gehe” (FA 24: 598). In other words, when the mode of reproductive observation has been fully processed through deductive thinking in the creation of an idea, all of the sudden one could say, perhaps, at a dull yet enriched moment the productive imagination turns on� 3 The imagination operates then strictly on the basis of this deduced idea and creates (virtual) images that may not contradict this idea and therefore possess an intrinsic lawfulness. Consequently, the fantastic creativity of the imagination cannot go astray and will always operate within the limits of the natural forms of reality, whatever fantastic images and shapes the imagination may produce� A key example that Goethe mentions himself is the metamorphosis of plants: “Welche Reihe von Anschauungen und Nachdenken verfolgt ich nicht, bis die Idee der Pflanzenmetamorphose in mir aufging! ” (FA 24: 597). When he reported the moment of this discovery to Herder from Italy, Goethe emphasized the creative and poetic impact of the “Urpflanze”: 308 Christian P� Weber Mit diesem Modell und dem Schlüssel dazu [i.e., der Metamorphose], kann man alsdann noch Pflanzen in’s Unendliche erfinden, die consequent sein müssen, das heißt: die, wenn sie auch nicht existieren, doch existieren könnten und nicht etwa malerische oder dichterische Schatten und Scheine sind, sondern eine innerliche Wahrheit und Notwendigkeit haben. Dasselbe Gesetz wird sich auf alles übrige Lebendige anwenden lassen. (FA 15/ 1: 346) One could call the outcome of this process, which is embodied in the elegy “Die Metamorphose der Pflanzen” and to which we shall return in greater detail, a real ideal (wirkliches Ideal) , because it is an abstraction that, derived from the reality of nature, maintains its intrinsically productive character in an idealized poetic form. The process of creating such phenomena of real ideality makes up one side of what is called here poetic realism. The other side is essentially the same process in reverse and results in what Goethe has called an object of “ideal reality” ( “ideale Wirklichkeit” ; FA 19: 183), namely the representation of the human body in ancient statues� The inverse directions of both processes are due to the different nature of the original object. Whereas the realm of plants is characterized by its great diversity of species and greatly differing appearances at various stages of their development, - all creating a chaos of sensuous impressions that calls for a scientific model of unity -, the human body presents itself in its greatest beauty at the early stage of mature development when it has reached a complete and well-rounded form. Art’s task is therefore to preserve and highlight the beautiful ideal of this real object against the nature of reality itself, that is, the aging process and the detrimental impact of other external forces. However, for Goethe, as I will argue in the final section of this contribution, the ideal artworks of ancient human statues gain in status as real objects precisely when they have been impacted by external forces and are encountered in a state of decline and ruin� It is only at this point that they turn into objects of a realist inquiry, yet this time not to study the metamorphic laws of nature but to restore the work of the human spirit at the peak also of its cultural development in ancient Greece. Poetic realism thus describes a dual cycle of lavish natural creation, scientific deduction, and poetic (re)creation on the one hand and of artistic creation, its destruction over time, and hermeneutic reconstruction on the other� Both processes are driven by the central conflict between nature and art and thus both belong to poetic realism, but they must be described separately for reasons that become clearer once we have obtained a better understanding of the complicated relationship between the general creativity of nature and the specific one of the human genius. Out of Ruin: Goethe’s Poetic Realism as a Method of Constructive Inquiry 309 The Poetic Realism of “Der Wandrer” The conflict between these two creative domains, nature and art, is programmatically staged in the poem that I mentioned in the beginning, “Der Wandrer.” An exhausted wanderer at first notices only glimpses of a landscape’s topography as he climbs, guided by a woman he encountered, a dusty path through rugged terrain. He suddenly detects ruins under overgrown vegetation: Spuren ordnender Menschenhand Zwischen dem Gesträuch -! Diese Steine hast du nicht gefügt Reich hinstreuende Natur […] Von dem Moos gedeckt ein Architrav! Ich erkenne dich. Bildender Geist, Hast dein Siegel in den Stein geprägt. (FA 1: 208—14; ll. 27—30, 32—34) The poem juxtaposes two forces of creation that manifest themselves in their products as natural vegetation (plants) and human artifacts (pillars and statues of a temple), for Goethe the preferred objects for his specific method of study and inquiry� He largely dismisses, for example, historical events or other human artifacts such as tools and commodities. In the lines cited, he draws a clear distinction between these two agents of production. Whereas nature scatters its products widely (“reich hinstreuend”) in a seemingly indifferent manner, the carved stones capture the wanderer’s attention because they were obviously once ordered, structured, and inscribed by the human hand of a formative spirit� Nature and art obviously operate here as antagonistic forces, similar to Goethe’s characterization of this relationship in an early review: “Kunst ist gerade das Widerspiel” against the permanent transformations of nature’s manifold seeds and “entspringt aus den Bemühungen des Individuums sich gegen die zerstörende Kraft des Ganzen zu erhalten” (FA 18: 99). During his classical period, Goethe appears to have changed his attitude owing to the encounter with ancient artworks during his sojourn to Italy. He realized that they have been produced according to the same natural principles that he had (re)discovered in his morphological studies. 4 One finds hints at a unity between nature and the arts already in “Der Wandrer.” At the sight of the woman’s cabin, built in and from the ruins of the previous “temple” (l. 53), for instance, the wanderer marvels about nature’s “motherly” care for her “children”: swallows build nests in the architrave, caterpillars form cocoons for their offspring in winter (as well as for their own metamorphosis), and so do humans erect shelters to protect themselves and their children (ll. 127—40). This enu- 310 Christian P� Weber meration integrates humans in the cycles of organic life and natural seasons and thus reaffirms a continuity of procreative activities that connect all living beings. Furthermore, the wanderer identifies the temple as the “Meisterstück” of a “Genius” (ll. 57—59) yet also associates it with the work of nature: “Schätzest du so Natur / Deines Meisterstücks Meisterstück? ” (ll. 78—79). Combined, these two factors form a physical and spiritual bond to link the two dynamisms of nature and art so that poetic realism can be applied to both as one method of phenomenological inquiry and description� But an attentive reader can also detect implicit reservations against the identification of one with the other: First, the cabin is not a temple! For the wanderer, it is a sacrilege that the temple’s fragments have been repurposed for profane use; it is not by coincidence that he bids farewell to the woman at the moment of this discovery (ll. 140—41). 5 Second, although the wanderer identifies the genius of the temple’s original builder as a rare masterful creation of nature, he leaves no doubt about their fundamental difference: “genius” still “weaves glowingly” over the ruins of “his grave” (l. 56) and is as such “immortal” (l. 60), whereas nature “insensibly demolishes” “her sanctuary” (ll. 80—81), the masterpiece of her masterpiece. The bridge between nature and art thus remains a rather weak one; both meet only on the grounds of nature being essential to life or in very rare, highly exceptional artworks that have emerged from a deeper insight into natural processes than nature possesses herself. (Both realms thus need further mediation about which I will say more in the conclusion.) Subsequently, Goethe continues to emphasize the fundamental difference between nature and art and the different attitudes of study required for their understanding in the comments of his translation of Diderot’s “Versuch über die Malerei” (1799): Die Natur organisiert ein lebendiges, gleichgültiges Wesen, der Künstler ein totes, aber ein bedeutendes, die Natur ein wirkliches, der Künstler ein scheinbares. Zu den Werken der Natur muß der Beschauer erst Bedeutsamkeit, Gefühl, Gedanken, Effekt, Wirkung auf das Gemüt selbst hineinbringen, im Kunstwerke will und muß er das alles schon finden. (FA 18: 563—64) What the works of nature possess in abundance, life and reality, artworks lack; vice versa, artworks contain thought, emotional depth, and meaningfulness which are all absent in natural phenomena. To compensate their mutual deficiencies is the double agenda of poetic realism: On the one hand, this method must make sense of nature by deducing from its rich abundance of appearances scientific ideas, through which nature is elevated to the status of a great artist; on the other hand, poetic realism must bring artworks to life and instill them with a reality that only natural objects have; it must animate art by providing the artwork with the distinctive qualities Out of Ruin: Goethe’s Poetic Realism as a Method of Constructive Inquiry 311 of living beings. Poetic realism’s first task is therefore to break down these ‘natural’ barriers and to mediate between these autonomous domains. Otherwise, nature remains just real and art just ideal: Hier ist wieder die Lebenswirkung der organischen Natur, die sich in allen Störungsanfällen, obgleich oft kümmerlich genug, in ein gewisses Gleichgewicht zu setzen weiß, und dadurch ihre lebendige, produktive Realität auf das kräftigste beweist, der vollendeten Kunst entgegengesetzt, die auf ihrem höchsten Gipfel keine Ansprüche auf lebendige, produktive und reproduktive Realität macht, sondern die Natur auf dem würdigsten Punkt ihrer Erscheinung ergreift, ihr die Schönheit der Proportionen ablernt, um sie ihr selbst wieder vorzuschreiben. (567) Nature possesses reality because of its ability to regenerate living organisms in the case of damage, to reproduce after an individual’s death, and to restore an equilibrium among living entities if a certain balance has been disturbed� Nature propagates with complete indifference for other formations like, for example, the deserted temple in the poem. But it lacks consciousness of the laws that govern its actions and the forms of its manifestations; only human minds can deduce these from natural phenomena and processes through attentive observation and experimentation� Vis-à-vis nature , the function of poetic realism therefore amounts mostly to the scientific task of gaining a deeper understanding of the reality nature puts on display� 6 Poetic realism complements and advances the sciences by representing dynamisms within and interrelations among living entities that remain invisible or beyond the scope of the human eye by crafting corresponding figures of speech and creating fictional totalities that simulate this reality. In this regard, poetic realism is constructive � Conceiving of this scientific-poetic process in terms of poetic realism allows us to suspend the strict distinction generally drawn between poetry (subjective fiction) and science (objective fact). Within the framework proposed here, both Goethe’s essay Versuch die Metamorphose der Pflanzen zu erklären (1790) and the later poem “Die Metamorphose der Pflanzen” (1798) belong to this same method of inquiring and representing nature� The same applies to the heterogenic corpus of text types in the Heften zur Morphologie (1817-1824), in which both essay and poem constitute integral parts� Eva Geulen’s recent attempt of a thick description of the Hefte attests to the problem of assigning a genre to this “kaleidoscopic” arrangement of texts that seems to vacillate between science, philosophy, and literature, and between form and non-form (see esp. 123—52). She therefore pleads for “die möglichst lange Suspendierung einer Fixierung der Morphologie auf den Wissenschaftsfeldern” (98). In the same vein, my contribution aims to define Goethe’s poetic realism as a method of inquiry operating 312 Christian P� Weber beyond the binary of either science (morphology) or poetry (for example, the genres of didactic poetry or the “Bildungsroman”). Instead, I propose a flexible epistemological schema of processing data from phenomena oscillating between object and subject, observation and imagination, in which both fields come into play simultaneously� Vis-à-vis the arts , poetic realism can animate artworks in two ways: One prioritizes process over product already in the making of the object, which means that the artwork must display traces of and poetologically reflect its own coming into existence. A prime example for this approach would be Goethe’s poem “Maifest” as shown in the introduction of this collection. Alternatively, process is added to the product after its creation, when the artwork is exposed to the natural forces of decay. While nature is intruding and ruining the artwork, it also charges it with life and reality, as the example of the temple in “Der Wandrer” shows. Poetic realism then becomes the hermeneutic task of reconstructing the perfection that has been lost and of regaining an understanding of the idea and the ideal that informed the making of the artwork. This latter method is especially suitable for the total, hermetically closed artwork like a statue. Whereas the human observer of natural processes must instill thought and imagination into a dynamic system that is lacking an identifiable spirit yet appears to be spiritual in some of its phenomena, the great artwork is saturated, to the contrary, with a surplus of spirit. Any artwork is the product of another human artist who has applied certain ideas, forms, and norms to the production of the work and thereby transformed a material (marble, paint, or language) into a specific shape, charging matter with specific meaningfulness. Regardless of its actual state, there will always remain traces of this (trans)formative spirit in any artwork. But the problem with autonomous artworks is often that its form corresponds to the individual ideas of its maker so completely that it shuns inquiry; the mind of the onlooker cannot enter and explore the work by the means of his/ her own hermeneutic imagination, so that it appears to him/ her almost lifeless. For poetic realism it is therefore advantageous if the artwork is not or no longer hermetically sealed in a well-rounded form but rather imperfect, or, better even, perfect but ruined as described above. The task of the real connoisseur of art is then to reconstruct or restore the artist’s thoughts and ideas that went into the work’s construction process based on its appearance in the present state. In the case of the wanderer in Goethe’s poem, we find indications of familiarity with the original artwork, since the wanderer is able to decipher the seal in the stone and identify the temple's dedication to Venus along with the no longer recognizable muses and graces (cf. l. 36—50; see Weber, Die Logik der Lyrik 387—411). In general, however, the exegete of an artwork must often draw Out of Ruin: Goethe’s Poetic Realism as a Method of Constructive Inquiry 313 also from scientific knowledge (for example anatomy or art history) to gain a thorough understanding of the studied artifact� Another example for Goethe’s poetic realism vis-à-vis an artifact is his imaginative, yet exact reconstruction of the façade of the Strasbourg Munster in his essay Von deutscher Baukunst (1772; FA 18: 110—18) and later again in Dichtung und Wahrheit (FA 14: 417—20). To the surprise of some local people, Goethe proved after repeated observation that the existing tower must have been executed differently from the original plan, which Goethe recreated with his mind’s eyes but got to see in material form only after he had figured out the deviation: “Aber so sollte es mir immer ergehn, daß ich durch Anschaun und Betrachten der Dinge erst mühsam zu einem Begriffe gelangen mußte, der mir vielleicht nicht so auffallend und fruchtbar gewesen wäre, wenn man mir ihn überliefert hätte” (FA 14: 544). Based on what has been stated thus far we may generalize: For both nature and art applies that the subject matter of inquiry per se is not just material but essentially also spiritual - though only implied (‘as if ’) and projected onto the object by the observing subject in nature’s case� Furthermore, poetic realism is not just processing given objects but essentially also co-(re)creating them in this process. In short, poetic realism is dealing with phenomena, and its method is phenomenological both in terms of inquiry and the representation of outcomes, often resulting in the creation of new artistic phenonema. Consequently, poetic realism is not about the transmission of knowledge and therefore can neither be founded on nor establish traditions� It is grounded in lived experience, not factual knowledge. 7 Yet poetic realism produces another, its own kind of knowledge in acts of mediation between an imagining/ thinking subject and a perceived object of study. This mediation constitutes an embodied co-presence of the subject with its object in a ‘joint venture’ to construct or reconstruct a dynamic schematic copy of the object� 8 Strictly speaking, these virtual objects only last for as long as the cooperative, productive oscillation between the imagining subject and the reflecting object is maintained. In this regard, the produced knowledge remains fleeting and entirely subjective; it is aesthetic and can be shared only as intersubjective experience. Hence, to communicate this aesthetic knowledge, it must be articulated in a poetic mode or apply poetic elements in scientific discourse, because only poetry allows a reader to reexperience the original experience of mediation and (re)constructive cooperation between subject and object. In fact, all of Goethe’s works and fictional characters are phenomenal products of his realist method. In his “Zueignung” in Faust , Goethe appropriately characterized the figures or shapes that have (re)emerged in his imagination when resuming the work on this lifelong project - in a different literary context, 314 Christian P� Weber of course, but nonetheless as composite figures of the experience and memory - as “schwankende Gestalten.” In the second introductory essay to the Heften zur Morphologie, Goethe goes even further and rejects the term “Gestalt” altogether (see also Geulen’s chapter on “Schwanken,” 65—76), since he finds: daß nirgend ein Bestehendes, nirgend ein Ruhendes, ein Abgeschlossenes vorkommt, sondern daß vielmehr alles in einer steten Bewegung schwanke. Daher […] dürfen wir nicht von Gestalt sprechen; sondern wenn wir das Wort brauchen, uns allenfalls dabei nur die Idee, den Begriff oder ein in der Erfahrung nur für den Augenblick Festgehaltenes denken. / Das Gebildete wird sogleich wieder umgebildet, und wir haben uns, wenn wir einigermaßen zum lebendigen Anschaun der Natur gelangen wollen, selbst so beweglich und bildsam zu erhalten, nach dem Beispiele mit dem sie uns vorgeht. (FA 24: 392) The metamorphic shapes or figures that poetic realism (re)produces are therefore realistically transient and fluctuating only in a second or even third degree, since the objects of the inquiry, the phenomena of nature or the phenomenal works of art, themselves display elusive qualities; additionally, the sense organs and mental faculties that enable our experience and process understanding are equally elusive entities� For this reason, Goethe suggests in the explications of his so-called “gegenständliche Denken” that “jeder neue Gegenstand, wohl beschaut, ein neues Organ in uns auf[schließt]” (FA 24: 596). Such an “organ” can be, as Friedrich Schlegel proposed in his plea for a “neue Realismus” in the Gespräch über die Poesie (published in 1800), only poetic. 9 I will argue later that Goethe’s elegy “Die Metamorphose der Pflanzen” (published just a year prior to Schlegel’s statement) can be regarded a phenomenal “organ” not just of Goethe’s morphological studies of vegetal nature but also of the method of poetic realism� In the moments of oscillation between observation and imagination, the (re)constructing mind is in a poetic mode, for which Goethe often employs the weaving metaphor, 10 as illustrated in these verses of “Der Wandrer”: “Glühend webst du über deinem Grabe / Genius! ” (ll. 56—57). 11 At this point it has become indistinguishable whether this weaving genius refers to the formative spirit of the past, that is, the master who built the temple, or the formative spirit of the wanderer who is reconstructing the temple out of ruins with his mind’s eyes (and who may be addressing himself here). Once the wanderer opened himself entirely to the original spirit of the contemplated artwork, he has become, literally, ‘in-spired’; both the spirits of the past and of the present are operating now synchronously in the same creative manner so that it is no longer necessary to differentiate between the two. In the act of recreation, the wanderer is simulta- Out of Ruin: Goethe’s Poetic Realism as a Method of Constructive Inquiry 315 neously poetic (imaginatively constructive) and hermeneutic (reconstructively inspired). As such he exemplifies Goethe’s method of poetic realism. Another important condition for poetic realism to occur is the presence of the object under investigation. For the artwork or a natural object to speak to an observer, it must be there, or rather, ideally, the observer must be where the work/ object is situated and encounter it in the context of its genuine environment. In the poem, “genius” is weaving/ fluttering over its own grave, marking it as a genius loci . Goethe himself experienced “das Gefühl, de[n] Begriff, die Anschauung dessen, was man im höchsten Sinne die Gegenwart des klassischen Bodens nennen dürfte” (FA 15/ 1: 489) only at the ancient sites of Rome, yet neither in the books that he had studied in his youth, nor in his poetic imagination of “Der Wandrer.” For a revelation (“Offenbarung”) to occur, the subject must seek out certain objects. Not by accident is the lyrical subject of many of Goethe’s poems a wanderer; thus the homo viator is for Goethe not an individual but a flexible and adaptable (“beweglich und bildsam”) mode of existence of heightened awareness and increased porosity that comprehends the forms of nature or artworks “aus ihrem Mittelpunkt, ihren notwendigen Bedingungen” (W. v. Humboldt about “Goethes zweiten römischen Aufenthalt”; Werke 2: 406, my emphasis)� 12 Poetic realism, in other words, aims for the representation of the inner dynamism(s) and necessities that have brought the studied objects into existence; for this, the inquiring subject needs to reconstruct and relive in the imagination their construction process and ideally become identical with it. (This is a slight yet important modification to our discussion of “zarte Empirie” above. Identity is not desired with the object itself, but with the dynamic processes that brought it into existence�) To achieve this level of permeation, the subject must prepare for the encounter with the object. For poetic realism’s scientific validity, the empirical attention given to the object and the recognition of its context/ environment must precede any liberally imaginative musings of the inquiring subject� Goethe conceived of his Italian experience as a purification process for such sensual perception: “Meine Übung, alle Dinge wie sie sind zu sehen und abzulesen, meine Treue das Auge Licht sein zu lassen, meine völlige Entäußerung von aller Prätention, kommen mir einmal wieder recht zu statten und machen mich im Stillen höchst glücklich.” He adds that the overall impression of Rome with its many great artworks and ruins forms “ein Ganzes, das man sich lange denkt und träumt, nie mit der Einbildungskraft erreicht” (FA 15/ 1: 144). Yet prematurely imagined things lag behind the perceived real objects. Goethe’s program of “pure vision” therefore aims at getting rid of any preconceived notions and concepts and ideally even operates without the interference of other cognitive faculties (see the introduction) to obtain empirical data that is as “pure” as possible. 316 Christian P� Weber To this end, Goethe implemented a rigorous, ascetic method of observation that eliminates the overhasty imagination from the process of inquiry by operating in repeated, only slightly varied experimental settings. Otherwise, he feared, the slightest transitions and intimate relations between individual phenomena could be overlooked and impede the overall results of the research. Goethe’s scientific ambition was to collect all outcomes of rigorous observation and to process them in “eine Reihe Erfahrungen der höheren Art.” Only once this is accomplished can the faculties of the imagination, understanding, and reason be allowed to contribute and form out of these deduced higher experiences “ein Ganzes […], das der menschlichen Vorstellungsart überhaupt mehr oder weniger bequem und angenehm sei” (“Der Versuch als Vermittler von Objekt und Subjekt”; FA 25: 35—36). Operating with purified real phenomena, the productive imagination can no longer cause any harm to nature� If systematically applied to a wide range of phenomena, this objective method promises and offers a solid realistic, scientific basis from which humanity can set out to change the reality of social and cultural conditions without the dangers of relapsing into anti-natural ideological regimes of the past (first and foremost the theological doctrine of original sin, which Goethe contests for instance in “Die Metamorphose der Pflanzen”) or of venturing into revolutions motivated by illusory utopian visions� As we shall see in the following paragraphs, the decisive insights of the “metamorphosis of plants” were, however, not (just) the result of systematic research. Goethe often associates the various stages of this idea’s genesis and its different modes of representation either with fortunate events, such as the coincidental reading of Homer in the public garden of Palermo or the eminent encounter with Schiller in Jena, or with situations of personal crisis. Yet Goethe also intentionally inserts autobiographical accounts of disappointing and disillusioning episodes in his scientific writings to mark these setbacks’ creative impact. Such setbacks inspired Goethe to look deeper into the subject matter and challenged him to experiment with new, increasingly poetic means of representation. Especially vis-à-vis the phenomena of nature, such drawbacks must first shatter the subjective persona of the observer so that the dynamic processes of nature can enter the human mind just as the grass and thistles of the wanderer poem grew into the stones of the temple and thus made their presence felt� Vis-à-vis the ruins of antiquity, however, a reverse process must be applied. Here, as a second example of Goethe’s admiration for fragmented ancient statues and Winckelmann’s reconstruction efforts will show, the imaginative spirit of the observer must reconquer the artworks that were ruined by nature and reanimate the individual spirit of the original artist as well as the Greek (or Roman) culture from which they have emerged. To accomplish this, Goethe Out of Ruin: Goethe’s Poetic Realism as a Method of Constructive Inquiry 317 believes, the art historian must not just be informed about the cultural history of ancient times but also by anatomical and physiological knowledge of the human body as well as by the humanistic ideals and virtues of his/ her own age. In this regard, poetic realism also performs a mediation and translation between various ages and cultures in human history� The final antagonism between art and nature with which we began remains still unaddressed: Can an oscillation also occur between these poles? Could poetic realism bring both into play simultaneously? The following inquiry will hint in its conclusion to how a mediation between them could be accomplished. In general, however, the strict separation of these two creative domains must be maintained because, according to Goethe, both nature and art exist as autonomous dynamisms and manifest themselves as real only within this antagonism. Each must withstand the force of the other. This mutual resistance drives them to permanent creation, which makes each of them real first and foremost. Poetic realism must acknowledge both domains on their own terms and not confuse them. Hence, this article deals with nature and art separately, even though the general method of poetic realism applies equally to both� The Real Ideality of “Die Metamorphose der Pflanzen” Ever since Wolff’s generative theory of vegetable growth and reproduction called “epigenesis” was published in 1759, the sciences became increasingly convinced that living beings and even geological structures are no static products of a divine creator but the always transient manifestations of autonomous self-organizing forces in ever-ongoing processes of formation and deformation� This paradigm shift from mathesis to dynamism resulted in two new major problems: First, these organic driving forces (akin to gravity, electricity, magnetism, etc�) remain invisible since no material basis can be detected for them� Consequently, they remain, ultimately, an affair of speculation; only the effects of these forces can be studied as phenomenal changes and developments in the shapes of certain objects� This leads to the second problem of determining the relation between force and form. How force turns into form remains a great mystery that cannot be solved but, at best, contained through the coinage of new metaphors. Examples are Bergmann’s “Wahlverwandtschaften” (elective affinities) mainly for chemical processes and Blumenbach’s “Bildungstrieb” ( nisus formativus , drive of formation) as a name for the vitalist principle that integrates the processes of generation, incorporation of nutrients, and reproduction and guarantees for the specific form of each species of plant or animal. Goethe’s morphology, based on the principle of “metamorphosis,” falls under the same category of a hybrid concept� He argues for the existence of a mal- 318 Christian P� Weber leable archetypical and “ transcendental ” organ, which is the leaf and of which all plant organs are real modifications. In the process of metamorphosis, the “leaf ” can undergo various transformations and bring forth an endless variety of leaf shapes and plant species, partially depending on environmental conditions� The “metamorphosis of plants” thus amounts to a flexible and dynamic schema for the generation of plants as such� The metamorphosis is an intuitively and experientially deduced real form of the imagination that can explain the various appearances of real plants and even invent new imaginary ones. As such, metamorphosis differs from the previously mentioned metaphorical concepts because it does not aim to bring the conflict between force and form to a standstill by merely stamping a name on the blind spot� Instead, metamorphosis is a dynamic and flexible principle of change that has itself undergone significant change over the course of Goethe’s practice of poetic realism� Goethe’s ‘idea’ of a “metamorphosis of plants” developed in a process of continued observations, descriptions, drawings, and dreaming of plants over a period of many years, generating spontaneous moments and levels of insight� Three passages from his Italienische Reise beautifully illustrate the oscillation between imagination and observation that triggered this idea� Initially, Goethe set out to find an actual “Urpflanze” which was supposed to be an archetypical, primordial plant from which descended, as he assumed, all other existing plant species. By the time of his sojourn in Italy, however, Goethe must have grown disillusioned about this ambition. He now calls this seemingly impossible quest a “Gespenst” and “alte Grille” (FA 15/ 1: 286). Yet the specter of the “Urpflanze” haunts him again during repeated visits to a public garden in Palermo. At first, the garden strikes him as “der wunderbarste Ort der Welt” due to the various and strange shapes of plants, intense color impressions, and especially the “starke Duft,” which makes everything appear even more wonderfully. This fantastic place with its mystic-aesthetical atmosphere triggers Goethe’s poetic imagination; it reminds him of the “Wundergarten” of the Phaeacians in Homer’s Odyssey and inspires him to compose a new play based on the “Nausicaa” episode (April 7, 1787; 258—59). During another visit just ten days later, however, the “Wundergarten” has transformed into a “Weltgarten.” The genius loci now triggers a different response, and the tone of Goethe’s report turns more scientific: “Die vielen Pflanzen, die ich sonst nur in Kübeln und Töpfen, ja die größte Zeit des Jahres nur hinter Glasfenstern zu sehen gewohnt war, stehen hier frisch und froh unter freiem Himmel und, indem sie ihre Bestimmung voll erfüllen, werden sie uns deutlicher” (April 17, 1787; 285—86). Evidently, once the initial spell has vanished, the garden demands closer observation� Consequently, the focus of inquiry changes as well: Goethe no longer hopes to identify one archetypal Out of Ruin: Goethe’s Poetic Realism as a Method of Constructive Inquiry 319 plant from the great variety of plants in this “Weltgarten”; instead, he ventures to examine “worin denn die vielen abweichenden Gestalten von einander unterschieden seien,” although he still finds “sie immer mehr ähnlich als verschieden” (285—86). These two initial steps, the aesthetic inspiration to poetic creation and subsequent call for closer inspection and proto-scientific comparison, are followed by a third step that fuses both into one vision� A month later, Goethe reports to Herder his breakthrough from Naples: Ferner muß ich Dir vertrauen, daß ich dem Geheimnis der Pflanzenzeugung und Organisation ganz nahe bin und daß es das einfachste ist, was nur gedacht werden kann. […] Die Urpflanze wird das wunderlichste Geschöpf von der Welt, um welches mich die Natur selbst beneiden soll. (May 17, 1787; 346) Here, the crucial step is made from observing to thinking (“was nur gedacht werden kann”). For Goethe, as he explains elsewhere, the forming of a “lebendige Bund” between the “Augen des Leibes” and the “Geistes-Augen” is necessary for the advancement and elevation of the sciences (FA 24: 432). Accordingly, he now calls the transcendental vision of this virtual object, which differs greatly from the “Urpflanze” he had originally imagined, a “most whimsical creature,” because it is really two things in one: a “Modell” or type deduced from manifold appearances of natural plants and a dynamic schema of the imagination which provides the “Schlüssel” of metamorphosis. When both “model” and “key” operate in unison, the poetic mind can “Pflanzen in’s Unendliche erfinden, die consequent sein müssen” because, although they are only virtually real, they nonetheless possess “eine innere Wahrheit und Notwendigkeit” (FA 15/ 1: 346). At this neuralgic point of his argument, Goethe recites Aristotle’s formula of realism according to which a poetic work must demonstrate “inner truth(fulness) and necessity” for support. In the same entry Goethe mentions yet another key-player and ally. Again, it is the author of the epic about the shape-shifting hero Odysseus, Homer, whose descriptions and similes “uns poetisch vor[kommen] und doch unsäglich natürlich [sind] […]. Selbst die sonderbarsten, erlogenen Begebenheiten haben eine Natürlichkeit, die ich nie so gefühlt habe als in der Nähe der beschriebenen Gegenstände” (FA 15/ 1: 345). This statement is crucial for poetic realism because it emphasizes the necessity of the objects’ presence and the subject’s emphatic response to them as decisive factors for their understanding and successful representation. Goethe evokes Homer and Aristotle, these two towering figures of ancient poetry and philosophy, to receive their legitimatizing blessing for his agenda of a constructive and (re)inventive poetic realism which aims to challenge the prevailing realism conceptions of his time� 13 320 Christian P� Weber Without doubt, the self-inscription of Goethe’s discovery of the metamorphosis of plants into the great ancient tradition, the enthusiastic tone of his reports, and the perhaps exorbitant claim that endlessly new plants could be invented based on his schematic model attest to Goethe’s elated state of mind in Italy� Yet, this period of success, joy, and feeling of world expansion is soon followed by a period of disappointments, great despair (“Verzweiflung”; FA 24: 414—15), and forced concentration when he returns to Weimar. In the same breath that he complains about the deprivation (“Entbehrung”) of his senses from “dem herrlichen Kunstelement,” he stresses how he composed himself and how his “spirit awakened” and wove together all “previous threads” of his botanical research into one theory that deduces “die mannigfaltigen, besondern Erscheinungen des herrlichen Weltgartens auf ein allgemeines, einfaches Prinzip” (415—16). But more disappointments follow: Göschen, the publisher of Goethe’s collected poetic works, rejects the printing of the Versuch die Metamorphose der Pflanze zu erklären , which eventually appears with a minor publisher in 1790. And instead of praise, the aspirational essay - organized in 123 sections that intend to spell out the ABC of organic formation as a new propaedeutics for the sciences - receives mostly ridicule. Goethe laments how his poetic reputation prevented a more serious scientific reception: “Man vergaß, daß Wissenschaft sich aus Poesie entwickelt habe” and “man bedachte nicht daß […] beide sich wieder freundlich, zu beiderseitigem Vorteil, auf höherer Stelle, gar wohl wieder begegnen könnten” (420). Yet again, however, Goethe succeeds in transforming his personal disillusion about the scientific community into productive energy. To prove the point that science and poetry belong together, he translates the uninspiring ‘dead’ letters of his scientific pamphlet into “die lieblichen Bilder” and “das lebendige Gleichnis” (423) of an elegy by the same name: “Die Metamorphose der Pflanzen” (1798). The episodic manner in which Goethe narrated the history (and decidedly his story) of his scientific-poetic discovery of “the metamorphosis of plants” in Italy, the concept’s discursive publication in an academic essay, and finally its poetic regeneration in the form of an elegy, make evident that both the positive Italian and the negative German periods equally contributed to its genesis� Goethe wished to mark the polar-opposite states of elation and despair, expansion and concentration, in order to highlight that this/ his story itself should be perceived as living and metamorphotic in accordance with his theory of rhythmically pulsating polarity and intensification (“Polarität und Steigerung”), and as such, as a real event� The process of metamorphosis has reached its climactic culmination point with the creation of the elegy. As an accumulative product of Goethe’s Italian and Weimar experiences, it contains all in one: joy and pain, love and despair, the threat of separation and reunification, observations of nature and Out of Ruin: Goethe’s Poetic Realism as a Method of Constructive Inquiry 321 philosophical reflection, realism and idealism. In short: The “Metamorphosis” is truly a wonderfully whimsical poem, a “Wundergebild” (l. 40) of poetic realism. Being far more than merely a transposition from scientific discourse to poetry, the elegy aspires to be nothing less than the (re)creation of an organic lifeform in the medium of language� As such it presents a symbol of poetic realism par excellence. Brimming with meaningfulness beyond comprehension under a single idea, the full complexity and potential of the specific meanings it contains cannot be hermeneutically realized all at once� For that reason, Goethe republished the elegy in various contexts over a period of almost forty years since its first publication in 1798. Herein, he deliberately followed the model of nature: Fernerhin bei Darstellung des Versuchs der Pflanzen-Metamorphose mußte sich eine naturgemäße Methode entwickeln; denn als die Vegetation mir Schritt für Schritt ihr Verfahren vorbildete, konnte ich nicht irren, sondern mußte, indem ich sie gewähren ließ, die Wege und Mittel anerkennen wie sie den eingehülltesten Zustand zur Vollendung nach und nach zu befördern weiß. (FA 24: 442) Within each of the altogether four transmission contexts - 1798 in Schiller’s Musen-Almanach für das Jahr 1799 devoted to idylls, 1800 under the rubric “Elegies II” in Goethe’s edition of Neue Schriften , 1817 within the essay “Schicksal der Druckschrift” as part of the Hefte zur Morphology , and finally 1827 among a series of philosophical poems arranged under the heading “Gott und Welt” for the Ausgabe letzter Hand - this versatile text actualizes or “reveals” (“enthüllt”) another layer of its potential meaning with every publication, a layer which is “eingehüllt” in the text like in the seed of a plant. 14 Over the course of the listed transmissions, the poem seems to develop its very own poetic dynamism and to pursue an intrinsic teleology with a necessity and consequence comparable to that of a natural living being� To further enhance the lively and lifelike representation of his teaching of metamorphosis, Goethe employs innovative poetic means and rhetoric devices that become more evident when compared to Albrecht von Haller’s “Die Alpen,” a very successful didactic poem first published in 1722 and reissued many times since. If Goethe was a scientific poet, Haller was a poetic scientist. A comparison between both texts also highlights the shift in the sciences: Haller’s poem represents nature according to the Linnéan taxonomic paradigm, that is, the classification of plants in species, families etc. based on the different shapes of sexual organs and their spatial arrangement in a hierarchical order� In contrast, the Goethean paradigm of metamorphosis emphasizes temporal change and draws developmental analogies across the divides between species. Goethe’s poetic innovations must therefore be seen as a response to this new dynamic paradigm and the need to develop adequate means of representation for it� 15 322 Christian P� Weber As a consequence of this paradigm shift, the immense popularity of Haller’s “Alpen” faded. Lessing contributed to this work’s obsolescence through his poetic criticism in the programmatic essay Laokoon (1766). He used the lines from Haller’s work rendered below as a negative example to explain his own semiotic theory, according to which poetry should present a progressing action in narrative sequence instead of indulging in painterly descriptions� Dort ragt das hohe Haupt am edlen Enziane Weit übern niedern Chor der Pöbel-Kräuter hin; Ein ganzes Blumen-Volk dient unter seiner Fahne, Sein blauer Bruder selbst bückt sich und ehret ihn. Der Blumen helles Gold, in Strahlen umgebogen, Türmt sich am Stengel auf und krönt sein grau Gewand; Der Blätter glattes Weiß, mit tiefem Grün durchzogen, Bestrahlt der bunte Blitz, von feuchtem Diamant; Gerechtestes Gesetz! daß Kraft sich Zier vermähle; In einem schönen Leib wohnt eine schönre Seele. Hier kriecht ein niedrig Kraut, gleich einem grauen Nebel, Dem die Natur sein Blatt in Kreuze hingelegt; […] Dort wirft ein glänzend Blatt […]. (Haller 18—19; ll. 381—92, 394) Evidently, Haller’s description of the meadow follows the static epistemological model of a topological ordering system (see Breidbach, Metamorphosenlehre 72—77): here is a plant of this species, there is one of another kind, there yet another etc. However, as much he differentiates among plants, Haller still blurs the limits between inorganic minerals and the decisive distinctions within organic beings (plants, animals, humans) to secure a complete representation of nature, for example in the phrase “der Blumen helles Gold.” But then, in a contrary move, Haller utilizes his painting of alpine nature as an allegory for the hierarchical structure of the Swiss society that distinguishes the noble individual (“edlen Enzian”) from the majority of subservient “Pöbel-Kräuter” by a principle of the “gerechteste Gesetz.” This law proclaims the general identity of political “Kraft” and aesthetically pleasing “Zier” as well as the unity of bodily and spiritual beauty (ll. 389—90), all legitimized by the symbol of Christian religion, the “Kreuz,” which ‘nature’ inscribed into the lower-ranked plants. As much as the famous Swiss scientist and poet may have been directly inspired by the beautiful landscape and cultural traditions of his homeland, his “Alpen” are certainly not a work of poetic realism because their ‘ideal’ order has been imposed onto nature by a preconceived political and theological ideology rather than having emerged from the study of nature. In the words of Lessing’s concluding judg- Out of Ruin: Goethe’s Poetic Realism as a Method of Constructive Inquiry 323 ment of this poetic example: “Ich höre in jedem Worte den arbeitenden Dichter, aber das Ding selbst bin ich weit entfernet zu sehen” (126). In contrast, the following lines selected from Goethe’s poem “Die Metamorphose der Pflanzen” showcase a far more dynamic and also egalitarian model of nature� The focus of these lines is on an action, the plant’s sequential metamorphosis, so that Lessing could have quoted them - had they existed yet - as a positive example for his semiotic poetics: Gleich darauf ein folgender Trieb, sich erhebend, erneuet Knoten auf Knoten getürmt, immer das erste Gebild, Zwar nicht immer das gleiche, denn mannigfaltig erzeugt sich Ausgebildet, du siehsts, immer das folgende Blatt, Ausgedehnter, gekerbter, getrennter in Spitzen und Teile Die verwachsen vorher ruhten im untern Organ. Und so erreicht es zuerst die höchst bestimmte Vollendung, Die bei manchem Geschlecht dich zum Erstaunen bewegt. Viel gerippt und gezackt, auf mastig strotzender Fläche Scheinet die Fülle des Triebs frei und unendlich zu sein. Doch hier hält die Natur, mit mächtigen Händen, die Bildung An, und lenket sie sanft in das Vollkommnere hin. […] Und ein Wundergebild zieht den Betrachtenden an� Rings im Kreise stellet sich nun, gezählet und ohne Zahl, das kleinere Blatt neben dem ähnlichen hin. Um die Achse bildet sich so der bergende Kelch aus, Der zur höchsten Gestalt farbige Kronen entläßt. Also prangt die Natur in hoher, voller Erscheinung Und sie zeiget, gerecht, Glieder an Glieder gestuft, Immer erstaunst du aufs neue sobald sich am Stengel die Blume, Über dem schlanken Gerüst wechselnder Blätter bewegt. (FA 1: 639—41; ll. 23—34, 40—48) The differences between both poems are particularly striking due to their similarity of topic. But in contrast to the “Alps,” this excerpt from the “Metamorphosis” offers a fast-paced narration of continuous change, driven by an innate drive of the primordial organ, the leaf� Temporal adverbs and verbs of action organize and dynamize the entire narration, while descriptive elements remain subordinate to the generative and transformative process and consequently appear in adverbial rather than adjectival positions� The process is further driven by an alternation between expansion (the growth of the plant’s stem, ll. 23—32) and contraction (the formation of blossoms, including a piston and stamens, 324 Christian P� Weber ll. 33—48), which is further reflected in the poem’s basic, yet variably applied beat of the dactylic meter (a stressed syllable followed by two unstressed ones) and the elegiac distich’s oscillation between hexameter and pentameter. The poem’s flexible form thus accords with the main principles of Goethe’s theory of nature, polarity and intensification (see Tantillo 12—103). Janina Wellmann even argues that the hexameters recite the orthodox Linnéan botanical terms, whereas the pentameters operate as Goethe’s counterpunch by instilling messages and terms that conform with his teaching of metamorphosis (164—68). The mature stage of the plant’s development concludes by a shift from the mode of observation to more detailed description and thereby a halting of the progressive narration to ensure a momentary reflection: “Viel gerippt und gezackt, auf mastig strotzender Fläche / Scheinet die Fülle des Triebs frei und unendlich zu sein” (ll. 31—32). The description in the hexameter is, however, not entirely objective but subjective and metaphorical when it evokes the image of sailing on the sea (“gerippt,” “gezackt,” “mastig”) in combination with the earlier line “Knoten auf Knoten getürmt” (l. 24). The judgment articulated in the pentameter “frei und unendlich,” consists, then, not of ideas imposed onto the object like in Haller’s “Alpen” but, instead, ideas generated by the close observation of the object and, further, by inferring a limit of observation for the generative drive that echoes Kant’s aesthetic category of the sublime. Similarly, the surprising appearance of the word “gerecht” (l. 46) - which functions as an intertextual marker, almost a relic of Haller’s imposed “gerechteste[s] Gesetz” that is juxtaposed with the intrinsic lawfulness of the “Metamorphose” - articulates a judgment motivated by the plant’s regular growth, “Glieder an Glieder gestuft.” 16 These poetic liberties take nothing away from the poem’s realism; to the contrary, by marking the points of transition from objective observation to subjective, imaginatively inflected description and aesthetic reflection, they display the operational method and reveal the epistemology of poetic realism� Returning to the fundamental scientific problem addressed at the beginning, namely the impossibility to observe or record the driving force of life itself, this example makes evident that the scientist must resort to poetic means and a method of poetic realism that oscillates between observation with “Augen des Leibes” and imagination with “Augen des Geistes.” On this basis and again with support of the elegy, we may now also address, as far as possible, the second problem and mystery: how force turns into form (or ‘dead’ matter into living, eventually even artistically gifted organisms). We find a correlation between force and form already in the first stage of the imaginary plant’s genesis that the lyric speaker per forms for his beloved: “Einfach schlief in dem Samen die Kraft, ein beginnendes Vorbild” (l. 15). One should understand this apposition literally: the seed contains a forceful beginning because it strives towards the Out of Ruin: Goethe’s Poetic Realism as a Method of Constructive Inquiry 325 archetypal “pre-image” or form it is programmed to fulfill. Force and form are inseparably tied together in the seed: the form motivates and preconditions the force as an ideal for the specific metamorphosis of ‘the plant’ the seed aspires to become, while force is also a precondition of form because any temporal schema implies change that requires energy� Under this consideration, Goethe’s plant operates in agreement with the theory of preformation, only with the important distinction that this pre-form is, indeed, an “image” without materiality; therefore, the seed does not contain the plant itself that simply unfolds like a genie from a bottle. Only with life support of sunlight, soil, and moisture does the seed sprout “die Gestalt der ersten Erscheinung” (l. 21). In this regard, Goethe belongs to Wolff’s epigenesis camp, only that Wolff would have been unwilling to accept the existence of anything invisible to the human eye� The microscopic vision of the materialist cannot confirm the existence of a preconceived spiritual “image” that becomes ‘visible’ only to the “Geistes-Augen” (mind’s eyes) of the poetic realist. According to Goethe, such materialist (self-)limitation hinders the scientist not least to see the bigger picture of an “Analogie der Form” between plants, animals, and humans (FA 24: 432—33; see also Tantillo 76—78). At the next stage of the poetic plant’s metamorphosis, a “consecutive drive” regenerates and raises “immer das erste Gebild” (ll. 23—24). The German word “Gebild” (structure, shape) still retains the idea of “Bild” (image), yet it is already more than that. It now has gained material reality, and the drive has developed a structure that is, if we follow Goethe’s precise language, in agreement with its ideal “Vorbild” (model image). Just when the growth of the plant appears to be - for an (imaginary) onlooker, that is, and not for the drive itself - “free and indefinite,” “nature” intervenes in this process of “Bildung” (l. 33) “with mighty hands” so that the drive withdraws into itself to create the “Wundergebild” (l. 40) of a blossoming flower so attractive to the onlooker. Having thus reached its “höchst bestimmte Vollendung” (l. 29), nature “prangt” (shines forth resplendently) in “hoher voller Erscheinung” (l. 45). It deserves notice how intricately Goethe interconnects - here and throughout the poem - the lexemes of “Gestalt” (shape, figure), “Schein” (shine/ illusion) as in “Er schein ung” (appearance), “Bild” (image) and “Gebild” (structure), accompanied also by “Stimme” (voice) as in “be stimm t” (ll. 29, 52, 70). No less notable is the use of metaphorical language (“mit mächtigen Händen,” at the next stage “die göttliche Hand”) to characterize the actions of the most abstract agent simply called “Natur.” As the best solution to express the unknown and unspeakable, the lyrical speaker quite ‘naturally’ resorts to poetic language and, as this speaker addresses the delicate issue of procreational organs, to mythology. “Hymen” is called upon to execute a symbolic wedding within the plant’s innermost circle and to conceal the act of sexual reproduction with a 326 Christian P� Weber mist of sweet fragrances: “Und hier schließet die Natur den Ring der ewigen Kräfte, / Doch ein neuer sogleich fasset den vorigen an; / Daß die Kette sich fort durch alle Zeiten verlänge, / Und das Ganze belebt so wie das Einzelne sei” (ll. 59—62). These lines conclude the metamorphosis of plants (though not yet the poem) and return to the beginning� This generic, increasingly imaginary sketch of the plant’s metamorphosis becomes a symbol for all other plants (ll. 65—66) and eventually for nature altogether (ll. 67—70). It represents the quintessence of the lyrical speaker’s accumulated higher experience of his plant studies and the reconstruction effort that was motivated by his beloved’s initial confusion (ll. 1—4). Literally inseminating the beloved with this dynamic and versatile schema, the poetically represented schema of the plants’ metamorphosis becomes an intellectual, even spiritual “Vorbild” (cf. l. 15) for the cycle of procreation in nature generally and in the protagonists’ relationship more specifically (ll. 71—80): “Dies ist die höhere Natur, die Realität, in der sich das Erkennen selbst aus der Subjektivität des Erlebens […] in die Objektivität des Lebens umsetzt” (Breidbach, Metamorphosenlehre 189)� In its entirety, Goethe’s elegy exemplifies the sophistication of understanding the method of poetic realism can reach and the brilliant (poetic) phenomena it can produce� As an ideal monument of the possibility and productivity of this realistic method of understanding, the “Metamorphosis” testifies also to the fact that Weimar classicism is not just idealistic but built on a firm foundation of realism, as the next section will confirm regarding another of Goethe’s obsessions: ancient statues� “Ideal Reality”: Goethe’s Reconstruction of Antiquity What is called Weimar classicism, the friendly cooperation between Goethe and Schiller from 1794 until the latter’s death in 1805, emerged not by coincidence - if we follow Goethe’s account of what he labeled in hindsight a “Glückliches Ereignis” - from a dispute about whether the metamorphosis of plants embodies an idea (as per Schiller) or experienced reality (as per Goethe). Prior to this event, both men considered each other antagonists� Schiller attempted to reconcile his own sentimental ‘idealism’ with what he perceived as Goethe’s naive ‘realism’ in his essay Über naive und sentimentalische Dichtung , but he failed to synthesize both positions. Similarly, in “Glückliches Ereignis” Goethe stressed the “ungeheure Kluft” between the polar modes of thinking of his “hartnäckiger Realismus” and the idealism of his “educated Kantian” friend (FA 24: 436—37). Both notions, he admits, remained irreconcilable. Yet Goethe and Schiller were still able to cooperate, as they proved during their very productive partnership, and they prevented one another, as Zumbusch pointed out, from falling into Out of Ruin: Goethe’s Poetic Realism as a Method of Constructive Inquiry 327 extremes: “Der Idealist (Schiller) will den Realisten (Goethe) davor bewahren, in den Grenzen der Natur steckenzubleiben: umgekehrt kann der Idealist vom Realisten den ‘nüchternen Beobachtungsgeist’ und die ‘resignierte Unterwerfung unter die Notwendigkeit’ lernen” (158). For as long as their “Bund” lasted, the two quarreled with each other in the “possibly irreconcilable competition between subject and object,” but they did so to their mutual benefit and to that of many others (FA 24: 437). Goethe’s characterization of both positions deserves closer attention for a more nuanced understanding of the conflict between realism and idealism and what these terms signify. At the beginning of “Glückliches Ereignis,” Goethe marks the point of his and Schiller’s divergence before they collaborated� Apparently, they were separated by two different modes of perception and intuition rather than by different modes of reflection. In short, both had different ideas about what reality means: “Anstatt sie [die Natur] selbständig, lebendig vom Tiefsten bis zum Höchsten gesetzlich hervorbringend zu betrachten, nahm er [Schiller] sie von der Seite einiger empirischen menschlichen Natürlichkeiten” (FA 24: 435—36). The first half of this statement is a precise characterization of Goethe’s own realism. With terms like “selbständig,” “höchste,” and “gesetzlich,” he locates the ideal within nature, whereby he attributes to his realism an idealism that he denies Schiller’s conception, whose sporadic empiricism detects only incoherent “ Natürlichkeiten ” instead of comprehending the whole of Natur � Goethe thereby presents himself not just as a realist, but as the only true idealist, whereas he depicts Schiller as a dilettante realist and therefore also as a naive, pointless idealist at best� By deconstructing Schiller’s early idealism, Goethe demonstrates that idealism must be based on realism and that any idealism is, indeed, always an ideal realism. In his “Winckelmann” essay from 1805 which appeared in the month of Schiller’s death, Goethe coined the term “ideal reality” (“ideale Wirklichkeit”) for ancient statues as “the highest works of art” (see FA 19: 184; quoted in context below). A glimpse at Schiller’s poem “Das Ideal und das Leben” in the version of 1804 (Schiller 152; the poem was first published under the title “Das Reich der Schatten” in 1795) reveals how greatly his anti-real idealism differs from Goethe’s ideal poetic realism: Whereas the Olympian gods reside in “[e]wigklare” and “spiegelreine” spheres (l. 1), the mortal humans must live on earth in the state of a precarious limbo “zwischen Sinnenglück und Seelenfrieden” (l. 7). Unlike the genius of the Goethean wanderer, who continues to create (“weben”) glowingly over the ruins of his prior creation, the youth of Schiller’s gods blossoms like “Rosen […] / [w]andellos im ewigen Ruin” (l. 5—6). The divine “ Gestalt ” (l. 26) that “wandelt oben in des Lichtes Fluren” (l. 25) is for the gods alone and remains out of reach for the humans who are dragged down by 328 Christian P� Weber their heavy “Körper[n]” (l. 20), unless they follow Schiller’s appeal to free their spirit from their anxious, miserable physical existence� Goethe would never have given in to this kind of escapist fantasy. To the contrary, for him the human body is the non plus ultra of natural forms: “das letzte Produkt der sich immer steigernden Natur, ist der schöne Mensch” (FA 19: 183). For Goethe, art’s most sacred task is not to ignore or undo the flaws associated with the human body but to preserve it at the peak of its fleeting beauty. The beauty of the human figure (“menschliche Gestalt”) is the natural foundation upon which the human spirit must build to reach its highest possible state of existence in an “ideal reality”: Ist es [das höchste Kunstwerk] einmal hervorgebracht, steht es in seiner idealen Wirklichkeit vor der Welt, so bringt es eine dauernde Wirkung, es bringt die höchste hervor: denn indem es aus den gesamten Kräften sich geistig entwickelt, so nimmt es alles herrliche, verehrungs- und liebenswürdige in sich auf und erhebt, indem es die menschliche Gestalt beseelt, den Menschen über sich selbst, schließt seinen Lebens- und Tatenkreis ab und vergöttert ihn für die Gegenwart, in der das Vergangene und Künftige begriffen ist. (184; my emphasis) Granted, this characterization sounds at first much like Schiller’s version of classicist Weimar idealism. “Wirklichkeit” refers here not to the life-world, but to the manifestation of an alternative “ideal reality” that the artwork brings forth as its effect. This reality effect appears “ before the world ,” not in the world � Nonetheless, it also represents the quintessence of “all forces” from this world , which the work of the artist transcends, “indem er sich mit allen Vollkommenheiten und Tugenden durchdringt, Wahl, Ordnung, Harmonie und Bedeutung aufruft, und sich endlich bis zur Produktion des Kunstwerkes erhebt” (184). In the statue, human body and intellect are fused into one hyperreal appearance of humanity’s possibilities in this world, which makes the statue another prime creation of poetic realism� In his essay on Winckelmann and already in the introductory essay for his art journal Propyläen (1798), Goethe insists on the rootedness of his idealistic conception of art in the experience of the real� This reality is not limited to the body’s surface but comprises also - countering the second Mosaic commandment - the body’s subcutaneous organs that the artist (and art historian) must study and internalize: Die menschliche Gestalt kann nicht bloß durch das Beschauen der Oberfläche begriffen werden, man muß ihr Inneres entblößen, ihre Teile sondern, die Verbindungen derselben bemerken, die Verschiedenheiten kennen, sich von Wirkung und Gegenwirkung unterrichten, das Verborgne, Ruhende, das Fundament der Erscheinung sich Out of Ruin: Goethe’s Poetic Realism as a Method of Constructive Inquiry 329 einprägen, wenn man dasjenige wirklich schauen und nachahmen will, was sich, als ein schönes ungetrenntes Ganze, in lebendigen Wellen, vor unseren Augen bewegt. […] Was man weiß, sieht man erst! (FA 18: 462—63; emphasis added) Classical aesthetics combined, as Helmut J. Schneider pointed out, beauty with life; accordingly, the ideal artwork had to be grounded in the laws of nature - only under this condition could it manifest itself as living beauty (Schneider 240). Such a great work of art affects the onlooker with its genuineness and uniqueness while it simultaneously embodies and symbolically refers to a greater whole, an entirely different world beyond its physical presence. In short, the ideal-real beauty of the statue has the power to transport and transform. Nothing exemplifies this effect better than the following attempt by Winckelmann to capture the intrinsic spirit of the famous Apollon of Belvedere: Ich vergesse alles andere über dem Anblicke dieses Wunderwerks der Kunst, und ich nehme selbst einen erhabenen Stand an, um mit Würdigkeit anzuschauen. Mit Verehrung scheint sich meine Brust zu erweitern und zu erheben […], und ich fühle mich weggerückt nach Delos und in die lycischen Haine […]: denn mein Bild scheint Leben und Bewegung zu bekommen, wie des Pygmalions Schönheit. (qtd. in Schneider 246) In the final sentence, it remains inconclusive whether the “image” (“mein Bild”) refers to the artwork or to the onlooker’s image of it. According to our definition, the oscillating state of Winckelmann’s vision between object and subject characterizes this description as a work of poetic realism. 17 Winckelmann can be considered a forerunner of poetic realism also in terms of another dimension of reality. In Goethe’s judgment, Winckelmann’s greatness rested not least on his capability to transform the dire circumstances of his personal reality by experiencing the ancient artworks’ brimming with ideal reality. According to Goethe’s account, he was one of the “vorzügliche[n] Geister” who had “die Eigenheit, eine Art von Scheu vor dem wirklichen Leben zu empfinden, und in sich selbst zurückzuziehen, in sich selbst eine eigene Welt zu erschaffen” (FA 19: 177). The ancient artworks corresponded to Winckelmann’s innermost being and transported him to an alternative reality attuned with his own ideals. Yet, he engaged with them in a realistic, scientific manner (as described above): “Wir finden bei Winckelmann das unnachlassende Streben nach Ästimation und Konsideration; aber er wünscht sie durch etwas Reelles zu erlangen. Durchaus dringt er auf das Reale der Gegenstände, der Mittel und der Behandlung; daher hat er eine so große Feindschaft gegen den französischen Schein” (208). The objects Winckelmann chose to focus on, the great artworks of Greek antiquity, reveal something essentially real in that they are all - for Goethe as 330 Christian P� Weber much as for Winckelmann - manifestations of a culture driven by a cult of the real, that is, they themselves are products of poetic realism: Nach einerlei Weise lebte der Dichter in seiner Einbildungskraft, der Geschichtsschreiber in der politischen, der Forscher in der natürlichen Welt. Alle hielten sich am Nächsten, Wahren, Wirklichen fest, und selbst ihre Phantasiegebilde haben Mark und Knochen. Der Mensch und das Menschliche wurden am wertesten geachtet, und alle seine innern, seine äußern Verhältnisse zur Welt mit so großem Sinne dargestellt als angeschaut. Noch fand sich das Gefühl, die Betrachtung nicht zerstückelt, noch war jene kaum heilbare Trennung in der gesunden Menschenkraft nicht vorgegangen. (180) Both Winckelmann and Goethe aspire to an ideal humanism grounded in the real experience of and interactions with the life-forms closest to them: the omnipresent nature and a culture shared with their compatriots. Winckelmann becomes for Goethe a model for the eighteenth-century experience firstly because he was sensitive enough to realize the deep rift between his present existence in the stratified society of a provincial German town with what he reimagined to be the reality of ancient Greek communities. Secondly, Winckelmann is exemplary because he imagined escaping and actually did escape the misery of his age and home country by becoming the custodian of the Vatican collections, by surrounding himself with remnants of an (imagined) ideal, yet once real beauty, and by reconstructing from the fragments of ancient traditions the essential realism of a past Greek culture that he promotes as an ideal(ized) model for the reformation of contemporary society� Yet, when Goethe composed his eulogy at the beginning of the nineteenth century, Winckelmann’s legacy was already threatened. Quite literally, his body of work, the Vatican collection of ancient artworks that he curated in Rome, had been mutilated by looting Napoleonic troops� In the aftermath of the French Revolution, the great number of decapitations, displacements, and dispossessions brought Winckelmann’s dream to an abrupt end. Goethe aims to counter this trend: “Man hat vielleicht jetzo mehr Ursache als jemals, Italien als einen großen Kunstkörper zu betrachten, wie er vor kurzem noch bestand” (FA 18: 475). To substitute for the destruction and dismemberment of the real “Kunstkörper,” Goethe pleads in almost real-political fashion for the construction of an “ideal” one (“idealen Kunstkörper”). By this he means a national museum which would provide the closest substitute for the now obsolete experience of encountering artworks in their initial cultural environment. 18 No matter whether natural phenomena or artworks, their experience must always start with the observation of the physical object ideally located in its original context (471). Out of Ruin: Goethe’s Poetic Realism as a Method of Constructive Inquiry 331 For Goethe, as for Winckelmann and their mutual idea of the ancient Greeks, knowledge grows gradually from the intuition of the real thing to the realization of its typical characteristics and intrinsic lawfulness. Goethe articulated this progressive process of cognition in the essay “Einfache Nachahmung, Manier und Stil” for the arts, in “Die Metamorphose der Pflanzen” for nature, and in a short text that lists the graduation from the empirical via the scientific to the pure phenomenon for scientific inquiry. Crucial for Goethe’s phenomenological epistemology is that the original experience is never suspended by any ‘higher’ form of abstract cognition or representation but sublated ( aufgehoben ) in it in a Hegelian sense� Moreover, the various stages of the formative cognitive process should not be considered as separate but transitory moments within a greater dynamic� This dynamic can be reversed through a hermeneutic process. Like the “transcendental leaf ” can be deduced through scientific inquiry as the generative principle and organ that has actualized itself in a myriad of vegetal appearances, so can the original spiritual blueprint of an artwork be recovered even from its most mutilated state of appearance when the realist method of inquiry and knowledge is applied: “Die Restauration von den ursprünglichen Teilen, die Kopie von dem Original zu unterscheiden, in dem kleinsten Fragment noch die zerstörte Herrlichkeit des Ganzen zu schauen, wird der Genuß des vollendeten Kenners” (471). Goethe recommends his poetic principle of ideal realism as a natural antidote against the general destruction, cultural dispersion, and cognitive distraction of his age: “denn wie die gesunde Faser dem Übel widerstrebt, und bei jedem kranken Anfall sich eilig wieder herstellt; so vermag auch der jenen eigene gesunde Sinn sich gegen innern und äußern Unfall geschwind und leicht wieder herzustellen” (FA 19: 180). The ancient ruins’ call for their restauration does not just concern them as objects but also us as human subjects� Their tradition from past cultures is a gift for present and future ones because - as works of poetic realism - they allow glimpses of a cultural greatness that may be an eternal measure and model for any generation. Ancient ruins thus offer humanity a playground to test and develop their skills through close observation and imaginative, yet (self-)controlled interpretations. But they can only do so because they have been disintegrated by time and nature� In its destructiveness, nature is thus productive not just to procreate its organic life-forms but indirectly also to regenerate human culture� The ruins of antiquity stimulate the imagination to restore the original image of what was once whole, and this cure of poetic realism to their ailment can potentially also cure the ailments of cultural division and destruction of present times. At least this was Goethe’s hope. 332 Christian P� Weber The Moving Human Body as the Mediating Agent of Poetic Realism Now that we have characterized the two processual strains of poetic realism, let us return in closing to the introductory question about the relationship between nature and art: What connects the two processes and motivates the entire cycle that poetic realism performs? In the poem “Der Wandrer”, we already identified two linking factors in the preliminary characterization of poetic realism: First, the drives of self-preservation and procreation have generated artistic measures of protective care that all living organisms share and that link them in a chain of being. Second, exceptional works of art, like the ancient statues or Goethe’s “Metamorphose der Pflanzen,” have been created in accordance with nature’s generative principles and eternal laws. In addition, we may now add as a third factor the mediating and supervising agency of the human body, more precisely the physically moving body set in motion by an imaginatively curious and intellectually agile mind� As we have seen, from Goethe’s humanistic viewpoint the human organism appears as nature’s crowning and, though only fleetingly, most beautiful achievement; its integral system of neuro-sensory organs makes it the most precise apparatus to measure all other living beings and things within the sphere of our existence. Nonetheless, humanity cannot rest in itself: “indem der Mensch auf den Gipfel der Natur gestellt ist, so sieht er sich wieder als eine ganze Natur an, die in sich abermals einen Gipfel hervorzubringen hat” (FA 19: 183—84). The ancient Greeks summoned all their imaginative powers and intellectual faculties to recreate an idealized version of themselves in the image of human bodies at the height of their natural beauty� In their statues, this aspiration has resulted in lasting monuments. However, in perfect condition the well-rounded shapes of these statues appear lifeless and dead to an onlooker. It is rather in their (naturally) deteriorated state, in which they have been passed on to later generations, that they trigger a poetic effect in the attentive beholder. Only animated by the (re)productive imagination do these ideal forms become alive and real (again). Goethe’s credo as articulated in the poem “Die Metamorphose der Pflanzen” applies here as well: “Bildsam ändre der Mensch selbst die bestimmte Gestalt! ” (l. 70). The moved imagination and the moving body - with the senses, especially the eyes, operating as a set of mediating organs - are our portals to the world. Nothing embodies this better than the figure of the wanderer in Goethe’s poetry - a figure that occurs and recurs not only in the thus-titled early poem, but also in his later works, for example the Wilhelm Meister novels and Faust � Goethe was called “the wanderer” when he roamed the hills around Darmstadt and Wetzlar (which allegedly inspired “Der Wandrer,” “Wandrers Sturmlied,” and Out of Ruin: Goethe’s Poetic Realism as a Method of Constructive Inquiry 333 Werther ) alone in his early years; he also called himself a “wanderer” during his formative journey to Italy. The life of the tireless, always attentively observing and imaginatively reflecting Goethe therefore presents a fitting epitome of his method of poetic realism� Notes 1 I add here the original passage: “Die zweite Gunst der von oben wirkenden Wesen ist das Erlebte, das Gewahrwerden, das Eingreifen der lebendig-beweglichen Monas in die Umgebungen der Außenwelt, wodurch sie sich erst selbst als innerlich Grenzenloses, als äußerlich Begrenztes gewahr wird” (FA 24: 531). 2 “Es gibt eine zarte Empirie, die sich mit dem Gegenstand innigst identisch macht, und dadurch zur eigentlichen Theorie wird. Diese Steigerung des geistigen Vermögens aber gehört einer hochgebildeten Zeit an” (FA 13: 167). 3 Goethe applies the concept of “gegeständliches Denken” further to his production of poetry under the heading “gegenständliche Dichtung.” Again, it is the content of a motif, legend, or a tale from primordial times that marks the origin of a long-term reflection process and undergoes many internal transformations before it appears in a more refined “purer form” as a literary work (FA 24: 596). As remarkable as this statement’s content is the fact that Goethe forms here an analogy between his thinking and his poetic production. Deductive thinking turns for Goethe automatically into poetic activity, whereas poetic activity is characterized as a rethinking and reshaping of previous events and the thoughts associated with their transmission. 4 “Diese hohen Kunstwerke sind zugleich als die höchsten Naturwerke von Menschen nach wahren und natürlichen Gesetzen hervorgebracht worden. Alles Willkürliche, Eingebildete fällt zusammen, da ist die Notwendigkeit, da ist Gott” ( Zweiter Römischer Aufenthalt , September 6, 1787; FA 15/ 1: 424). 5 Even the classical Goethe admits that only a very few ancient artworks of the highest category are in agreement with the morphological laws of nature� 6 Wilhelm von Humboldt noticed this very clearly as a “special quality” of Goethe’s cognition: “Ich habe […] zu zeigen gesucht, daß Ihre Beschäftigungen mit den Naturwissenschaften eins sind mit Ihrem Dichtergenie, und daß beide aus dem Tiefsten Ihres Wesens, aus ihrer Art, die Dinge anzusehen und sich einen Begriff von ihrer Gestaltung zu machen, herstammen” (Letter to Goethe from Sept 4, 1830; in Goethes Briefe 551); Humboldt refers here to his review of Goethe’s Zweiten Römischen Aufenthalt � 334 Christian P� Weber 7 Breidbach emphatically emphasized this point in his study on Goethes Metamorphosenlehre (esp. 36—40). About the relationship between knowledge and poetry at the example of “Die Metamorphose der Pflanzen,” see also Stiening� 8 The active participation of the object(s) in the reconstruction process is crucial, as Goethe emphasizes in the opening lines of the Römischen Elegien : “Saget Steine mir an, o! sprecht, ihr hohen Paläste. / Straßen redet ein Wort! ” (FA 1: 393). The stones, palaces, and streets of Rome must contribute more than the inspiration of the traditionally evoked muses; their voices shall literally resound in Goethe’s Elegies ! Hence, “poetic realism” also means a poesy of real objects� Alternative attempts to label Goethe’s epistemology, such as “speculative empiricism” as suggested by Stiening (209—13), fall short in capturing this aspect. 9 I quote this passage here in its larger context because of its relevance for distinguishing Goethe’s “poetic realism” from the “ideal realism” of the early Romantics but also for highlighting their interdependence: “Der Idealismus in jeder Form muß auf eine oder andre Art aus sich herausgehn, um in sich zurückkehren zu können und zu bleiben, was er ist. Deswegen muß und wird sich aus seinem Schoß ein neuer, ebenso grenzenloser Realismus erheben. […] Auch ich trage schon lange das Ideal eines solchen Realismus in mir, und wenn es bisher nicht zur Mitteilung gekommen ist, so war es nur, weil ich das Organ dazu noch suche. Doch weiß ich, daß ichs nur in der Poesie finden kann, denn in Gestalt der Philosophie oder gar eines Systems wird der Realismus nie wieder auftreten können” (Schlegel 303). Whereas Goethe’s poetic realism is grounded in the intuition of specific objects and thereby produces a variety of ideal poetic “organs” that via analogy may lead to “gleicher Ansicht der Dinge” (as articulated in the final distich of “Die Metamorphose der Pflanzen”), Schlegel conceives of “das Organ” in the singular as the (social and ideological) realization of Idealism’s potential through the poetic establishment of a “neue Mythologie.” For a more detailed and incisive analysis of the Romantics’ (including Goethe’s) “organology,” see Weatherby. 10 In the essay “Bedenken und Erfinden” within the Hefte zur Morphologie (FA 24: 449—50), Goethe solves the epistemological dilemma of reconciling the simultaneity of the idea in understanding with the successively processing experience of sense perceptions by citing an old song - a slightly modified version of Mephisto’s lines 1922—27 from Faust - in which the weaving metaphor is applied to the productivity of nature� For more references to weaving in Goethe’s works, see the commentary in FA 24: 1075. Out of Ruin: Goethe’s Poetic Realism as a Method of Constructive Inquiry 335 11 Cf� the opening lines of the Römische Elegien, where the genius of the wanderer engages with the objects in a communication that is not (yet) reciprocated: “Saget Steine mir an, o! sprecht, ihr hohen Paläste. / Straßen redet ein Wort! Genius, regst du dich nicht? / Ja es ist alles beseelt in deinen heiligen Mauern / Ewige Roma, nur mir schweiget alles noch so still” (FA 1: 393). 12 Humboldt’s review deserves special mention in our context because it is the first and still valid attempt to describe Goethe’s method of poetic realism (although he is not using this term, of course). 13 A nuanced discussion of alternative realism theories around 1800 exceeds the scope of this contribution, but I will at least contrast the real ideality of Goethe’s elegy “Die Metamorphose der Pflanzen” to the realistic idealism of Albrecht von Haller’s popular didactic poem “Die Alpen” later. 14 On the poem’s versatility of meaning in diverse contexts, see Peters, Muenzer, and also Weber 2014� 15 Recent publications have also highlighted the pictorial innovations of visual representations and their relationship to textual representations� See fundamentally Breidbach 2005 and specifically for Goethe’s scientific writings Breidbach 2006, Bies (122—226), and Geulen. 16 Later editions of the poem replaced the word “gerecht” with “gereiht.” Perhaps the first version was just an error of the typesetter which has been later corrected� 17 This state could be regarded an inversion of Goethe’s Palermo experience, in which the atmosphere of the botanical garden transported him into the fictional world of the Odyssey � 18 Schiller responded very differently in both content and tone to the looting of ancient treasures by the French and English� See his nationalistic poems “Die Antiken zu Paris,” “Die deutsche Muse,” and “Dem Erbprinzen von Weimar” (Schiller 200—02) as well as Gerhard Kaiser’s juxtaposition of Schiller’s and Goethe’s reception of ancient statues (“Idee oder Körper”; 147—62)� Works Cited Bies, Michael� Im Grunde ein Bild. Die Darstellung der Naturforschung bei Kant, Goethe und Alexander von Humboldt. Göttingen: Wallstein, 2012� Breidbach, Olaf� Bilder des Wissens. Zur Kulturgeschichte der wissenschaftlichen Wahrnehmung. Munich: Fink, 2005. ---� Goethes Metamorphosenlehre. Munich: Fink, 2006. Geulen, Eva� Aus dem Leben der Form. Goethes Morphologie und die Nager. Berlin: August, 2016� 336 Christian P� Weber Goethe, Johann Wolfgang� Sämtliche Werke. Ed. Hendrik Birus et al. Frankfurt a. M.: Deutscher Klassiker Verlag, 1985-2015. [FA] Goethes Briefe und Briefe an Goethe. Vol� II�2: Briefe an Goethe der Jahre 1809 - 1832. Ed� Karl Robert Mandelkow. Munich: DTV, 1988. Haller, Albrecht von� Die Alpen und andere Gedichte. Ed� Adalbert Elschenbroich� Stuttgart: Reclam, 1965� Humboldt, Wilhelm von� Werke in fünf Bänden. Vol 2: Schriften zur Altertumskunde und Ästhetik. Ed. Andreas Flitner and Klaus Giel. Darmstadt: WBG, 2010. Kaiser, Gerhard. Goethe - Nähe durch Abstand. Vorträge und Studien. Jena/ Weimar: VDG, 2001� Lessing, Gotthold Ephraim� Werke und Briefe in zwölf Bänden. Vol. 5/ 2: Werke 1766 - 1769. Ed. Wilfried Barner. Frankfurt a. M.: Deutscher Klassiker Verlag, 1990. Muenzer, Clark. “Transplanting the Poem: Goethe, Ghosts, and the Metamorphosis of an Elegy.” Themes and Structures: Studies in German Literature from Goethe to the Present. Ed� Alexander Stephan� Columbia, SC: Camden House, 1997� 39—77� Peters, Günter. Die Kunst der Natur. Ästhetische Reflexion in Blumengedichten von Brockes, Goethe und Gautier. Munich: Fink, 1993. Richter, Karl. Literatur und Naturwissenschaft. Eine Studie zur Lyrik der Aufklärung. Munich: Fink, 1972. Schiller, Friedrich� Werke und Briefe in zwölf Bänden. Vol� 1: Sämtliche Gedichte. Ed� Georg Kurscheidt. Frankfurt a. M.: Deutscher Klassiker Verlag, 1992. Schlegel, Friedrich� Schriften zur Literatur. Ed� Wolfdietrich Rasch� Munich: DTV, 1985� Schneider, Helmut J� Genealogie und Menschheitsfamilie. Dramaturgie der Humanität von Lessing bis Büchner. Berlin: Berlin UP, 2011� Stiening, Gideon. “‘Und das Ganze belebt, so wie das Einzelne, sei’: Zum Verhältnis von Wissen und Literatur am Beispiel von Goethes Die Metamorphose der Pflanzen .” Literatur und Wissen: Theoretisch-Methodische Zugänge. Ed. Tilmann Köppe. Berlin/ New York: De Gruyter, 2011. 192—213. Tantillo, Astrida O� The Will to Create: Goethe’s Philosophy of Nature. Pittsburgh: Pittsburgh UP, 2002� Weatherby, Leif� Transplanting the Metaphysical Organ. German Romanticism between Leibniz and Marx. New York: Fordham UP, 2016. Weber, Christian P� Die Logik der Lyrik. Goethes Phänomenologie des Geistes in Gedichten. Freiburg: Rombach, 2013� ---. “Phänomenologie der visuellen Einbildungskraft in Goethes Gedicht Die Metamorphose der Pflanzen .” Zwischen Sichtbarkeit und Unsichtbarkeit. Visualität in Wissenschaft, Literatur und Kunst um 1800. Ed. Jürgen Kaufmann, Martin Kirves and Dirk Uhlmann. Paderborn: Fink, 2014. 97—115. Wellmann, Janina� Die Form des Werdens. Eine Kulturgeschichte der Embryologie, 1760 - 1830. Göttingen: Wallstein, 2010� Zumbusch, Cornelia� Die Immunität der Klassik. Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp, 2014.