Art. the Role of Mellefont in Miss Sara Sampson

8/12/2019 Art. the Role of Mellefont in Miss Sara Sampson

1/16

The Rle of Mellefont in Lessing's Miss Sara SampsonAuthor(s): Alison ScottSource: The German Quarterly, Vol. 47, No. 3 (May, 1974), pp. 394-408Published by: Wileyon behalf of the American Association of Teachers of GermanStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/404018.

Accessed: 29/05/2014 22:06

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at.http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

WileyandAmerican Association of Teachers of Germanare collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and

extend access to The German Quarterly.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 157.92.4.12 on Thu, 29 May 2014 22:06:45 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=blackhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=aatghttp://www.jstor.org/stable/404018?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/404018?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=aatghttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=black


2/16

THE ROLE OF MELLEFONT INLESSING'S MISS SARA SAMPSON

ALISON SCOTTIt is hardly necessary to-day to begin an article on Miss Sara

Sampson with an apologia for treating the work as interesting in itsown right, not merely as the first influential "biirgerliches Trauerspiel"in Germany.' Since 1949, when Otto Mann recognized in the play amature work, rather than part of Lessing's dramatic apprenticeship,2critics have concerned themselves with defining its moral viewpoint,linking this to the conception of the tragic which emerges, and find-ing an overall interpretation which might take into account thevarious strands of inner and outer action.3The problem of dramatic cohesion is not new. In 1758 J. J.Dusch, admittedly a biased critic, felt his attention being diverted toMarwood and Mellefont, ". . . und doch soll Sara uns allein inter-essieren.'"4 Modern criticism too has sometimes tended to see Marwoodand Mellefont as characters who fascinate in spite of their author.5More particularly, in the case of Mellefont, late nineteenth and earlytwentieth century criticism began by regarding him as a libertine ofthe old school, i.e. behind the times in which he is depicted as living;more recent criticism has ended by defining him as a subjectivist(Briiggemann) or as an individualist (Wolff),' i.e. in either caseas ahead of his times. Mellefont, in fact, is now generally seen as aforerunner of such "interesting weaklings" as the Prince in EmiliaGalotti, Goethe's Clavigo and Weislingen, Tieck's Lovell.' In cate-gorizing him thus critics have concentrated on the "content" of thecharacter-the philosophical obsession with marriage, the contrastwith Sara's strict ethical code-but not so much attention has beenpaid to the link between Mellefont's character and the structure andplot line of the play, to his function in Lessing's use of dramatic irony.An examination from this point of view leads, I believe, to the con-clusion that the Mellefont problem is in the end largely unresolved,but that precisely this, far from implying a weakness in the play'sstructure, reveals Miss Sara Sampson as a play of greater complexityand tragic depth than is usually assumed.

There are three sources of outward action in the play: Sir Wil-liam Sampson's attitude to the couple, Marwood's intrigues, andMellefont's complex character. All three are evident in Act I, thoughthe first does not now further exacerbate the lovers' plight. Sir Wil-liam's anger, having brought about the initial situation, their flight,

394

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


3/16

LESSING'S MISS ,SARA SAMPSON 395has evaporated and he is bent on reconciliation. From the secondsource, Marwood, springs much of the action and the outwardtragic conclusion of the drama; however much one may justifiablyregard Mairwood as more than a melodramatic villain,8 the forwardmovement of the play depends nevertheless on a series of plots hatchedby her. The first is the revealing of the couple's whereabouts toSampson before the play begins, the second her own arrival. The con-sternation caused in Mellefont by her letter announcing her presence(1,8) links the second with the third source of action, for Mellefontis already prey to deep misgivings about his relationship with Sara(1,3).Mellefont's character is an extraordinarily interesting one-thereformed libertine, tormented by indecision and a perhaps illusoryview of "freedom," a weakling, but one into whose mouth Lessingoccasionally puts ideas that were most dear to him: for instance,"Wie? muf3 der, welcher tugendhaft sein soll, keinen Fehler begangenhaben?" (p. 177),' which contains the notion of the admissibility,even the value, of error. Moreover, Mellefont has at least the poten-tial for external action. In a negative sense in fact, by delaying themarriage, which increases Sara's torments of conscience, he carriesout a pivotal action."t But we must still say potential for action, sinceLessing provides a highly interesting psychological situation and sev-eral clear leads which he does not develop further. Critical discussionof Mellefont has tended therefore, despite the critics' divergence onthe overall interpretation of the play, to see him as something whichLessing started but did not finish."1 But is the Mellefont problemreally dropped, or does it rather play its part in the drama in a muchmore subtle way?

The first scene in which we see Mellefont (I, 3) shows us a mantormented to the point where the violence of his feelings indicates adeep sense of unworthiness which is more than guilt at the specificact of having seduced an innocent girl and deprived her of her home.He calls himself "ein[en] Elenden . . . den die Erde nicht tragensollte," "einen Nichtswiirdigen . . . der auf keine Weise mehr seineigen war" (p. 172). In I, 7, the first time we see the lovers to-gether, Lessing presents sympathetically their widely differing viewsof life, though indeed Mellefont's argument for postponing the mar-riage, "daB unserer Verbindung hier diejenige Feier fehlen wiirde, diewir ihr zu geben schuldig sind" (p. 179), is unconvincing from aman who claims to set little store by outward appearances. It prompts



4/16

396 THE GERMAN QUARTERLYfrom Sara a speech in which she indicates the possibility of a situa-tion which would be for her even more tragic than the present one:

.. wenn ich es mir nicht zum unverbriichlichsten Gesetzegamacht hitte, niemals an der Aufrichtigkeit Ihrer Liebe zuzweifeln, so wiirde mir dieser Umstand - doch schon zuviel;es m6chte scheinen, als hiitte ich eben itzt daran gezweifelt.(p. 179)One might argue that in saying so she does in fact doubt him. ButLessing does not develop further this doubt in Sara herself. Howmuch justification she might have for such thoughts is known to theaudience but not to Sara. The potential conflict is there, but is neverallowed to develop after I, 7 into a direct confrontation between thelovers. For instance, IV, 1, with Sara's talk, at the height of herhappiness, of "Ahnungen" (pp. 213-14), of "dieses rebellische Etwas"(p. 215) that clouds her hope, is followed immediately by Mellefont'ssoliloquy, IV, 2 which reveals in his shrinking from marriage a realdanger to their future. But the effect is on the audience, not on Sara,who is unaware of the danger. Even in IV, 8, when Marwood makesa considerable issue of Mellefont's inconstancy and fear of marriage,Sara's reaction, while she apparently accepts the facts as related, isto ask how she can overcome this tendency in him. That it mightbe utterly impossible to overcome does not seem to enter her mind.

Her frequent premonitions of disaster are never in any way con-nected by Sara with this problem; in fact what plays a r81e here un-consciously (or at least remains unarticulated) is a deeply-rootedfeeling that she is a sinner and that sin must bring disaster and pun-ishment. Consciously, Sara's whole attitude to her situation, despitereal pangs of conscience and especially guilt on her father's account,is based on the conviction that her love for Mellefont is natural andgood and that he loves her. To his "mit was fiir Augen miissen Siemich betrachten " she returns a simple "Mit den Augen der Liebe,Mellefont"(I, 7, p. 178) and declares "ich [will] in der Welt weitervon keiner Ehre wissen . . . als von der Ehre, Sie zu lieben." It isstriking that with all her scruples about their relationship she neverfor one moment contemplates giving Mellefont up. As von Wiesepoints out,12 she wants to be reconciled to the moral order withoutdenying her love. Rempel's contention that Sara's initial fault causesa chain of events leading to a mental state where she could no longercommit the original fault13 ignores this single-heartedness in her love.

On Mellefont's self-justifying answer to her speech in I, 7 aboutdoubting him-"Der erste Augenblick Ihres Zweifels miisse der letzte



5/16

LESSING'S MISS SARA SAMPSON 397meines Lebens sein " (p. 179)--a dubious light is thrown by thescenes which follow. Act II, with Marwood's confident reference toMellefont's "schwache Seite" in the first scene (p. 182), provides inthe third and fourth proof that he has more than one. Despite him-self, he is soon embroiled in an argument with Marwood, justifyingin retrospect Norton's shrewd assessment of her influence (I, 9) byadmitting the power her very look exercises over him. His fear ofthis power, to which he ascribes a devilish force, is revealed in aseries of reactions to her ploy of returning his money to him:

Welcher Geist, der mein Verderben geschworen hat, redet ausIhnen (p. 187)Ich fliehe, weil mich mein Unstern in einen Streit von GroBmutzu verwickeln droht, in welchem ich am ungernsten unter-liegen miichte. (p. 187)Ich mul Sie verlassen, Marwood, oder mich zu einem Abscheuder ganzen Natur machen. Ich bin schon strafbar, daB ich nurhier stehe und Sie anhi6re. (p. 188)

The final effect is produced by the appearance of Arabella in scene4:Marwood: Was beschlieBen Sie, Mellefont?Mellefont: Was ich nicht sollte, Marwood, was ich nichtsollte . . . Ich bin schon, was Sie aus mir machenwollen: ein Meineidiger, ein Verfiihrer, ein Riuber,ein Mirder. (p. 190)

His reactions now are a series of questions:Mit euch zuriickkehren? Kann ich denn? .. . und ichVerruchter gehe doch nicht wieder in mich? (p. 190)

. miisste ich nicht eine eiserne Stirne haben, wenn ich esder ungliicklichsten Mil selbst vorsehlagen sollte? (p. 191)Marwood has "won," and her victory, though exceedingly brief-the length of one short scene, since Mellefont returns in scene 6 witha complete change of heart-is extraordinarily convincing. But con-vincing of what? In scene 6 Mellefont speaks of "dieser gefaihrlichenSchlinge" (p. 191), of the "Riinke einer Marwood" (p. 193) and asksin self-accusation:

War es mr6glich, dalB ich zwischen einer Marwood und einerSara nur einen Augenblick unentschliissig bleiben konnte? Unddal ich mich fast fUr die erstere entschlossen ,hitte? (p. 193)Nevertheless, it is not Marwood's skill at intrigue, however brilliantlyportrayed, which is the main point of scenes 3 and 4. The depiction



6/16

398 THE GERMAN QUARTERLYof her character would remain unchanged without her temporaryvictory, as would the external action: the failure of this intrigue, thepassing of the dagger into Mellefont's hands, the agreement thatMarwood should meet Sara. Scenes 3 and 4 are indispensable forthe portrayal of Mellefont's character. It is not merely a question ofMarwood's evil power or Sara's pure influence, but of Mellefont'svacillation and openness to influence. For most of the play Mellefontdoes not act, he reacts.14 Even in Act V, his actions, from his searchfor Marwood to his suicide, are impelled by frantic despair ratherthan bold initiative. The point is not that he hesitates between goodand evil, but that he hesitates. He is a man who is convinced of hisown basic unworthiness, who almost takes pleasure in giving in tothe influence of the moment and calling himself names in the pro-cess. If he acts, he regrets it later (his regret at having abducted Sarais probably greater than hers at having fled her home): if he hesi-tates, *he blames himself later (as in III, 5, where, thinking Sir Wil-liam bent on revenge, he regrets not having married Sara).

Act III brings Sir William's forgiveness and his readiness to ac-cept the lovers. Lessing thus removes the chief practical obstacle ofthe initial situation, and the problems of the rest of the play springdirectly from the characters themselves in their current relationshipsto one another. The beginning of Act IV shows the pair's happiness atits height. That is, it should show this, but the hope for a carefreefuture is at once marred for Sara by her premonitions and for Melle-font by his fear of marriage, expressed in the soliloquy of scene 2 andechoed in the conversation with Norton in scene 3. What is the con-flict here? Commentators on the play have tended to associate it withMellefont's "Flatterhaftigkeit," his inability to remain constant, whichMarwood refers to in her conversation with him in II, 3 and thengraphically describes to Sara in IV, 8. But must we not distinguishbetween these two things? True, Mellefont himself speaks of "Ver-maledeite Einbildungen, die mir durch ein ziigelloses Leben sonatiirlich geworden" (IV, 2, p. 216); and later he calls his attitudea "nlirrische Grille" (IV, 3, p. 218). But surely we must give Melle-font more credit here than he gives himself. His inconstancy belongsto the past; he really has reformed, and tempting as it is to questionthis in the light of modern psychology, we are twisting one of thebasic premises of the play if we do so. So moved is he, for instance,by Sara's unhappiness at the beginning that he says to Norton in I, 5:



7/16

LESSING'S MISS SARA SAMPSON 399Sieh, da liiuft die erste Trine, die ich seit meiner Kindheitgeweinet, die Wange herunter . . . Wo ist die alte Stand-haftigkeit, mit der ich ein schines Auge konnte weinensehen? Wo ist die Gabe der Verstellung hin, durch die ich seinund sagen konnte, was ich wollte? (p. 173)1.5And unedifying as his vacillation in Act II is, it is clear in scene6 that the break with Marwood is final. The premise that after a ten

years' relationship with Marwood during which he was frequently un-faithful to her, Mellefont should fall irrevocably and permanently inlove with Sara is perhaps hard to swallow, but this is a question ofcredibility of presentation and a different matter altogether. To theaudience of Lessing's time the notion of the reformed rake who hasfinally found true love would be both sentimentally appealing andbelievable; such figures were common enough in the literature of thetime.

What makes Mellefont a really complex character and uniqueamong mid-eighteenth century literary libertines is the futher dimen-sion Lessing has added. Mellefont wishes to be faithful to Sara tilldeath, yet he shies away from the formal marriage tie. This hesita-tion is honest and serious. Unless one argues that Mellefont is heredeceiving himself with grand talk of "inner freedom," one cannotinterpret his soliloquy as an indication that he intends to return tohis former way of life, a la Mr. B.16 His hesitation is a fine mixtureof philosophical conviction that a formal bond is external and mean-ingless (expressed already to Sara in I, 7) and personal fear, com-plicated by a feeling of guilt that he hesitates at all. He can shakeoff Marwood, but not his own past; whereas he is capable of faithful-ness to Sara, he is not capable of accepting marriage, for lack of tieshas become second nature to him. Are the philosophical argumentsthen merely cliches used to cover up his fears?- Sara Sampson, meine Geliebte Wie viele Seligkeiten liegenin diesen Worten Sara Sampson meine Ehegattin - DieHiilfte dieser Seligkeiten ist verschwunden und die andreHilfte- wird verschwinden (p. 216)Nowadays these words are apt to provoke a smile. But it seems to methat both Lessing's "Lehre der gemischten Charaktere," which Melle-font surely illustrates, and our view of Sara herself demand that weaccept Mellefont's objections to marriage as a genuinely held prin-ciple, while agreeing that this is not the whole of the picture. Thereseems little doubt that Lessing is "on Sara's side," that he affirms herethical viewpoint, but this means that we must regard Marwood andparticularly Mellefont as "mixed characters." Too weak a Mellefont



8/16

400 THE GERMAN QUARTERLYwould detract from Sara herself (just as a weak Lovelace wouldundermine our sympathy for Clarissa or a weak Valmont diminishthe Presidente de Tourvel). Sara is overwhelmed by her love, but shehas not lost all her judgment of character.

Lessing makes no direct use of the motif of Mellefont's hesita-tion after IV, 3 for Mellefont never tells Sara of his fears. However,by having "Lady Solmes" in IV, 8 describe very clearly to Sara Melle-font's "nunmehr zur Natur gewordenen Abscheu gegen ein f6rmlichesJoch" (p. 230), the author establishes a dramatic irony: for theaudience this scene brings more detailed evidence of what Mellefonthas described in IV, 3; for Sara it brings revelations which at firstthrow her into confusion and despair, but to most of which she givesno credence at all once she learns the identity of their bearer. Al-though Mellefont does not appear in IV, 8, we must digress to con-sider this scene, since it is crucial to an examination of the functionin the play of his dilemma. What effect does the scene have on Sara'srelationship with him?

Manfred Durzak"7 argues that this confrontation is central sinceit leads to a major inner development in Sara, who now recognizesthat Marwood's fault is as human and as humanly comprehensibleas her own,"' that Marwood is quite literally "eine mir ihnlichePerson" (in the words of her dream recounted in I, 7) who becomesin IV, 8 "die m6rdrische Retterin" (p. 233) in that she "saves" Sarafrom her cruel bias. Inner action (Sara) and outward action (Mar-wood) are fused, and Sara's moral idealism, till now bourgeois in itsacceptance of a double standard, till now existing "mehr im subjek-tiven Postulat als in vorgelebter Wirklichkeit," s is seen in new per-spective, her earlier expression of guilt is "als Rhetorik entlarvt,"'2 andshe both accepts Marwood as a human being and truly understandsher own guilt.21 Her readiness to die in Act V thus becomes genuinepenance and the deathbed scene gains real meaning,22 leading Durzakto the conclusion that the revolutionary element in the play isLessing's indirect criticism of traditional, "external" Christian morality,society's morality, and his championship of undistorted moral values.23

A great attraction of this thesis is that it provides an original ex-planation for Sara's words "m6rdrische Retterin" and "eine mir?ihnliche Person," and in retrospect for the dream, an explanationwhich makes sense from Sara's point of view.24 It is true that Sarauntil Act V readily accepts Mellefont's assessment of Marwood, whichis less than objective. But then we must regard Marwood's version of



9/16

JLESSING'S MISS SARA SAMPSON 401their relationship with equal care: in IV, 8, as elsewhere, her utter-ances combine a portion of truth, a certain realistic knowledge ofhuman nature, and enough calculating manipulation to make thewhole slightly suspect. Durzak's thesis is also fully tenable in thelight of Sara's last speech of the scene. But it breaks down in Act V,where there is simply no evidence in the text that Sara's attitude is"von Grund auf gedindert."25 In fact, the remarkable, and perhapsnot quite believable thing about the final act is that Sara, after whatmust have been hair-raising revelations concerning her lover's past,after the violent outbursts that end the meeting, is so little changed.Is she possibly slightly flattered that after all Mellefont should preferher? She is calm, does not accuse, but admonishes lovingly andgently; and her "Ich wiirde ohne Marwood vieles nicht wissen" (p.236) refers surely only to her knowledge of Arabella's existence, notto any acceptance of Marwood. Durzak claims: "Die Anerkennungder Person der Marwood ist nun vollzogen, indem Sara, die sichvorher geweigert hatte, auf einer Ebene mit der Marwood gesehenzu werden, nun darum bittet, ihre Stelle einzunehmen,"26 but it is astrange "Anerkennung" indeed which proposes to relieve Marwoodof the custody of her daughter, with the implied assumption thatSara is better fitted to bring her up Marwood is still "die b6se Mar-wood" (p. 234) ; Sara may now have greater understanding, but thereis to my mind a flavour of charitableness, of slightly condescendingforgiveness in her attitude, rather than a recognition that they aresisters under the skin. The moral pigeon-holes are still there and Saramakes as clear a distinction between herself and her rival as OdoardoGalotti eventually does between his daughter's case and that of GrdifinOrsina when he refuses to confuse "die gekrainkte Tugend" with "derRache des Lasters" (Emilia Galotti, V, 2). Sara is preoccupied atthe beginning of Act V with showing how she herself, not Mellefont,is to blame for the sequence of events, to the point where Nortonasks in irritation "Warum soll Mellefont niemals unrecht haben?"(V, 2, p. 235), and then with trying to dissuade those dearest to herfrom avenging her death on Marwood. Her concern here is clearlyfor the avengers, not for their potential victim; heavenly justice re-mains, "Marwood wird ihrem Schicksale nicht entgehen" (V, 10, p.244).

It is a curious characteristic of Miss Sara Sampson that the twofigures closest to each other operate, fulfil or destroy themselves al-most completely within their own separate spheres: 27 for Sara, the



10/16

402 THE GERMAN QUARTERLYpreoccupation with her guilt, for Mellefont his doubts about mar-riage. While it is true that at two points Sara tries to bridge the ideo-logical gap between herself and Mellefont by confessing her guilt andher fears (I, 7 and IV, 1), in the end these two spheres hardly touch.Their potential conflict, hinted at in I, 7 and made real and imme-diate in IV, 2, never develops into a confrontation between the twocharacters, and this very lack of confrontation emphasizes the gapbetween the two worlds. The main effects of this play are ironic.Most important of all, the audience knows-but Sara does not-thatan unbridgable chasm gapes between Mellefont and her, that he istorn by violent inner struggle, expressed significantly in potentiallytragic terms at the end of his soliloquy: "Doch es sind keineGesinnungen; es sind Einbildungen . . . Ich will ihrer los werdenoder-nicht leben" (p. 216).

The motif of Mellefont's unwillingness to marry then apparentlydisappears in Act V, at least as far as the main outward action isconcerned. It is almost as if the play takes a new turn since the em-phasis is now on Sara and her illness. With the revelation of Mar-wood's plot, harmony prevails, as Sara sees it, between herself andMellefont. Far from accusing him of unsteadiness of character, shedeclares: "Wenn ich noch den geringsten Zweifel an Ihrer Liebegehabt hitte, Mellefont, so wiirde mir ihn die tobende Marwood ge-nommen haben" (V, 4, p. 236). "Daf3 mich Mellefont also liebt, istunwidersprechlich gewifl," she affirms (p. 237), simply reproachinghim without rancor for not telling her about Arabella himself. Sheaccepts Arabella and, dying, wills Mellefont as substitute child toSir William, who has already declared: "Nun weif ich es, daf8 erdich aufrichtig liebt; nun g6nne ich dich ihm" (V, 9, p. 243). Infact, as far as the attitude of the other main characters to him isconcerned, Mellefont gets off lightly in this Act: "Ach, er war mehrungliicklich, als lasterhaft" (Sir William, V, 10, p. 247). They seeSara's death as resulting from the hatred of a rival, and-perhaps-from Mellefont's bad judgment in allowing Marwood to meet Sara.Why then does Mellefont refuse this interpretation put on the situa-tion by the other characters? Here Lessing does use, if only by im-plication, the motif of Mellefont's dilemma so strongly brought outin IV, 2. Again, only the audience and Mellefont are aware of it;the audience brings this awareness to bear on the words spoken byMellefont before he kills himself, so that audience and charactersmust understand these words in different ways.



11/16

LESSING'S MISS ,SARA SAMPSON 403Mellefont blames himself for Sara's death. From the other

characters' point of view, it is perhaps far-fetched to regard Mar-woods' hatred and thirst for revenge as his fault. But one might alsoconclude that he still gets off lightly, for to be forced to think ofhimself as Sara's murderer (which obviously no-one but he himself,and possibly Norton, is going to take seriously) is better than to haverefused to marry her when brought to the point. Sara almost wel-comes her death as a means of reconciling conscience and duty, buthow would she have reacted to such a refusal?

In what sense does Mellefont cry after Sara's death: "Und werist ihr Mirder? Bin ich es nicht mehr, als Marwood?" (V, 10, pp.245-46) ? Significantly, he has called himself a murderer once before;when he contemplated abandoning Sara in II, 4, he climaxes his out-burst of self-criticism with the words "Ich bin . .. ein Mbrder" (p.190), showing that he knows the effect on Sara of such a step. Andin Act V his onset of guilt more than equals in force Sara's earlierpreoccupation with her sin. Mellefont's comments on his own charac-ter have always been excessively severe. He regards himself as an"Unmensch," who had no business to become involved with Sara inthe first place. He cannot fulfil her dying wish, for he is too much ofa realist to believe that the past can be wiped out by an access ofbenevolence. And is it only the past that needs to be overcome? Isthere not still his dilemma, in essence unresolved, even though a prac-tical answer is made unnecessary by Sara's death? Mellefont's firstdecisive action of the play, therefore, is an act of despair-his suicide:"Es stehet bei mir nicht, das Geschehene ungeschehen zu machen;aber mich wegen des Geschehenen zu strafen-das steht bei mir "(V, 10, p. 246). Only because of what has happened? Or also be-cause of what might have happened had Sara not been murdered?Mellefont's declaration in IV, 2 that he will shake off his doubts"-oder nicht leben" (p. 218) now acquires greater significance. Hedies in accordance with his view of life and in complete oppositionto that of Sara, who would have rejected suicide as a solution.Mellefont is a lonely figure. Sara has sinned, but is surrounded bythose who forgive and love her (Betty, Norton, Waitwell, Sir Wil-liam) ; Mellefont himself has always appreciated her torment, whichhas contributed to his own. But who is there to understand him, oreven to take his doubts seriously? The tragic death is Mellefont's, notSara's with its aura of transfiguration, for Mellefont escapes in deathfrom his own nature. Dramatically, too, it is perhaps a more interest-



12/16

404 THE GERMAN QUARTERLYing death: Mellefont dies for something of which he is in a strict senseinnocent, but expiates something of which he is potentially guilty, thusescaping from an intolerable dilemma within himself.

Despite the harmonious atmosphere of Act V, Mellefont andSara remain as opposed as ever. This irrevocably tragic outcometends to go unnoticed because of the emphasis on Sara's reconcilia-tion with her father and with herself.28 Her reconciliation is com-plete, but the basic situation is unresolved: without marriage, evensecret marriage, the relationship is for Sara immoral; with marriage,it is for Mellefont intolerable and, if we regard his philosophicaldoubts as serious, in a sense also immoral. Both characters follow thespirit rather than the letter of morality, but their moral law is dif-ferent. If Marwood's last trick had failed, would Mellefont have over-come "diese nirrische Grille" and married Sara? It is doubtful. Ifind it difficult to accept Daunicht's argument that Mellefont in theend decides for Sara.29 True, he decides against Marwood, but thatis only half the story. In Act V he is in frenzied, though fruitless ac-tion on Sara's behalf, completely the solicitous and distraught lover;but the question of his being "for" Sara or not in the sense of fullyaccepting marriage with her has not been answered, it has simplybeen dropped. In this psychological situation Marwood is for Saraindeed a "m6rdrische Retterin": she saves her once by restoring herfather to her, then murders her, but thereby "saves" her again, fromthe ultimate conflict between two ways of life. Sara dies at peace withher world and herself; it is a rationally acceptable world, despiteMarwood's intrigues and her own murder. But a world in whichMellefont were to deny her marriage when all practical obstacles hadbeen removed would have been to Sara inexplicable. Her death, likeEmilia's, is the way out of an impossible situation, with the differencethat Emilia knows it and Sara does not.

Mellefont's dilemma is not used to motivate the Sara-action.But one cannot say it is dropped entirely, if one considers Melle-font's death important and does not regard the play as virtually overwith Sara's. Two sources of action were available to bring about thetragic outcome: Marwood's intrigues and Mellefont's character.Lessing chooses to use the first as the mainspring for Sara's spiritualdevelopment and her death. He presents us with a clear affirmationof Sara's code; the idealistic structure of the drama, to use Fricke'sphrase, is not threatened,30 but without the complexities of Mellefont'scharacter a dramatic irony would be lost, as well as the tragic dimen-



13/16

LESSING'S MISS SARA SAMPSON 405sion of destruction as an inevitable solution to irreconcilability. Forif we assume that Mellefont has, in the interval between Acts IV andV, resolved his dilemma, then Sara's death is brought about simplyby Marwood's intrigues, and her spiritual state at the end of the playcould have been achieved and maintained equally well had she lived.The very open-endedness of the play, as far as Mellefont's innerconflict is concerned, gives it depth.

Briiggemann declares roundly: "Lessing wagt es nicht, fiirMellefont einzutreten,"31 but the problem seems rather to be thatMellefont himself is afraid to champion his own cause.32 From con-temporary accounts such as Dusch's in his Briefe iiber 'Miss SaraSampson' the impression emerges that audiences in Lessing's timewere moved by Mellefont. To search beyond this for a perfect correla-tion between inner and outer action seems a mistake. We may surelygrant Mellefont his part in the inner action of the play by simply ac-cepting that there are two strands of development, Sara's and his own,which are resolved independently.

At the beginning of this article I mentioned the critical opinionthat Mellefont is the forerunner of such figures as the Prince inEmilia Galotti, Weislingen in Goethe's G6tz von Berlichingen andso on. Oehlke claims: "Mellefont ist der erste Weislingen, derVorglinger des Prinzen von Guastalla, bis auf ihn lassen sich Clavigound Fernando zuriickfiihren,"33 while Fricke says "Man kiinnte inder Tat . . . eine Linie ziehen, die von Mellefont iiber Weislingen,Clavigo, Lovell bis zu Godwi, Roquairol, Nolten und Larkensfiihrte."34 These figures do resemble each other in their hesitation,their tendency to let others act or even manipulate them. But, takingthe two nearest in date to Mellefont, can we really compare him toWeislingen or the Prince? Belief in a particular moral code plays nopart in the latter's wooing of Emilia and he recognizes no personalresponsibility for her death. Though Weislingen has political viewswhich differ from those of G6tz, they have little to do with his deser-tion of Maria, and the circumstances of his death are totally unlikethose of Mellefont's suicide. Only the comparison with Clavigo, be-cause of the philosophical theories on human relationships discussedin Goethe's play, might be fruitful.It is in the manner of his death that Mellefont parts companywith Weislingen and the rest, for he accepts responsibility for hisnature and his actions. At the end of Miss Sara Sampson the dis-crepancy between himself and the world is not resolved for Mellefont,



14/16

406 THE GERMAN QUARTERLYas it is for Sara. He dies in no blessed light of transfiguration, as shedoes, in no decisive heroic act like Philotas, but with devastating anddespairing realism. Paradoxically, he dies in a manner true to him-self in order to escape from himself. This solution to his dilemmais nevertheless not purely negative. An alternative course of action, away of accommodating himself to the world has been offered him,and Mellefont, till now suggestible and easily swayed by others, hasrefused it. At the beginning of the play he castigated himself for in-volving Sara in a liaison with a man "der auf keine Weise mehr seineigen war" (I, 3, p. 172). Through his expiation in death Melle-font becomes his own man again.University of Alberta

1 Heinrich Bornkamm, "Die innere Handlung in Lessings 'Miss SaraSampson'," Euphorion, 51 (1957), starts with such an apologia(p. 385); see also Gerhart Fricke, "Bemerkungen zu Lessings'Freigeist' und 'Miss Sara Sampson,'" Festschrift Quint (Bonn,1964), p. 96 (footnote) and Manfred Durzak, "Aufere und innereHandlung in 'Miss Sara Sampson.' Zur dsthetischen Geschlossen-heit von Lessings Trauerspiel," DVLG, 44 (1970), 47-49. An inter-esting recent view is that of T. Ziolkowski, who considers the playas theatre to be more advanced than Tasso or Iphigenie sinceLessing h:as constantly in mind the new style of natural actingevolving in the mid-eighteenth century and writes appropriategestures into the dialogue in an almost modern way (TheodoreZiolkowski, "Language and Mimetic Action in Lessing's Miss SaraSampson," GR, 40 (1965), 261-76).

2 Otto Mann, Lessing. Sein und Leistung, zweite Auflage (Hamburg,1961), pp. 222-23.3 Bornkamm, Durzak and to some extent Fricke are concerned withthis particular problem.4 Johann Jacob Dusch, Briefe ilber 'Miss Sara Sampson,' reprintedin part in Horst Steinmetz, Lessing-ein unpoetischer Dichter,Wirkung und Literatur, Band I (Frankfurt and Bonn, 1969), p. 54.5 Fritz Briiggemann (in the introduction to his edition of the play,Reihe Aufkldrung, vol. 8), suggests that while Lessing and theplay are "officially" on Sara's side, Mellefont is the most interestingcharacter (p. 8), a view which also emerges from Briiggemann'sarticle "Lessings Biirgerdramen und der Subjektivismus als Prob-

lem. Psychogenetische Untersuchung," JFDH, 1926, 69-110 (for MissSara Sampson, see pp. 69-78). Briiggemann, sees Marwood as "dertypische politische Mensch der vorbiirgerlichen Zeit" (p. 70), Saraas equally typical of the idealizzd bourgeois sentimentality of the1750's (which Lessing is supposedly criticizing) and Mellefont asahead of his time, a forerunner of subjectivism.



15/16

LESSING'S MISS SARA SAMPSON 4076 Hans M. Wolff, "Mellefont: unsittlich oder unbiigerlich?" MLN,61 (1946), 376. The question posed in the article's title is answered

thus: "Sara ist sittlich und biirgerlich; Mellefont ist wohl sittlich,aber keinesfalls biirgerlich" (p. 375). Wolff considers Mellefont anindividualist, rather than a subjectivist, since he does believe in anobjective order and objective rules of behavior.7 Typical of references in lexica and literary handbooks is that inFrenzel, Daten deutscher Dichtung, fiinfte Auflage (Munich, 1969)I, p. 147: "Weiterleben des Mellefont-typs in Guastalla, Clavigo,Weislingen, Fernando."8 Fricke's comments (pp. 101-4) on Lessing's skill in portrayingthis character, making her human although the action of the play

sems to demand that she is inhuman, represents the general con-sensus of critical opinion. Sse also Daunicht, p. 292.9 Quotations from the text of the play are taken from LessingsWerke, ed. Kurt W,6lfel (Frankfurt, 1967) I.10 Cf. Hans Rempel, Trag6die und Komddie im dramatischen SchaffenLessings (Berlin, 1939), p. 38, on Mellefont's hesitation as anessential ingredient of the tragic outcome. Fricke too commentsthat this aspect of Mellefont's nature is demanded by the action ofthe play (p. 106).

1' Fricke, for instance, concedes that Mellefont's character even morethan Marwood's is developed beyond the purely functional, but henevertheless insists "doch dabei handelt es sich um Ansiitze, weitentfernt, die idealistische Struktur des Dramas zu bedrohen" (p.107).

12 Benno von Wiese, Lessing (Leipzig, 1931), p. 36.13 p. 50.14 Rempel points out the same element in the portrayal of Sara (p.38), ascribing it to Lessing's schooling in the comedy and hisadaptation of comic structure for tragedy. This passiveness isparticularly bound up with the conception of the bourgeois drama:cf. a remark by another of the latter's chief exponents, Diderot,in his Entretiens sur le Fils Naturel of 1757, where he says "Le

mrouvementnuit presque toujours h la dignitA; que votre principalpersonnage solit rarement le mechaniste de votre piece" (DenisDiderot, Oeuvres Esthetiques [Paris, 1959], p. 139).15 On Mellefont as a changed character see Hans Wolff's brief analy-sis, cited above (especially p. 374). Wolff sees Mellefont's tem-porary vacillation in Act II as less important than his subsequentfirmer commitment to Sara, especially since Marwood has causedthis vacillation by appealing to him as father, not as lover. Durzak,on the other hand, finds Mellefont's reactions to Sara and to Mar-wood to be the same, sensual in nature, and believes Mellefonttries to justify his love for Sara as different by frequent ref-erence to her virtuousness (p. 53).16 Mr. B., in Richardson's Pamela (1740), is so moved by Pamela'svirtue that he marries her, only, however, in the lesser known



16/16

408 THE GERMAN QUARTERLYsequel Pamela in her Exalted Position (1741), to continue hisescapades after their marriage.

17 "Aulfere und innere Handlung in 'Miss Sara Sampson.' Zur aisthe-tischen Geschlossenheit von Lessings Trauerspiel," DVLG, 44(1970), 47-63.s1In the most recent study of the play F. Arthur Brown sees Sara'sdevelopment differently: the emphasis is on Sara's abandonmentof her initial exaggerated, Old-Testament-oriented denunciationof her own guilt and her development of a milder, more humanunderstanding of it, expressed in the crucial scene with "LadySolmes," so that she can forgive herself as well as accept forgive-ness from her father ("Sara Sampson: the Dilemma of Love,"Lessing Yearbook II, 1970, pp. 140-41). The end of the play is forBrown thus a delicate balance between "Sara's hope of redemptionand her lingering fear of retribution" (p. 144), and the latter,Sara's awareness that a basically good human love has potentialfor disaster, makes the play genuinely tragic (p. 145).

19 Durzak, p. 55.20 Ibid. p. 55.21 Ibid., p. 60.22 Ibid., pp. 61-62.23 Ibid., p. 63.24 Though I have no alternative interpretation to offer which wouldcarry as much significance, the thought occurs that "eine mirdihnliche Person" in I, 7 might simply mean "a woman," i.e., asopposed to a man. On the interpretation of the dream, see alsoBrown, pp. 145-46.25 Durzak, p. 61. If Sara is changed, it is surely more in Bornkamm'sthan in Durzak's sense, i.e. having accepted her father's forgive-ness, she in turn forgives Marwood and tears up the incriminatingletter (Bornkamm, pp. 392-93).26 Durzak, p. 61.27 As Fricke has pointed out (p. 107), there is in general in thisdrama no "Miteinander" of any characters, simply "isoliertesNebeneinander."28 Bornkamm's contention that the play's conflict is "gelbst und nichtnur erlitten und ertragen" (p. 393) is thus only true in the nar-row context of Sara's own character.29 Daunicht, p. 291.30 Fricke, p. 107.31 Briiggemann, "Lessings Biirgerdramen und der Subjektivismus alsProblem," p. 77.32 On the problem of Lessing's attitude to Mellefont, cf. Fricke, pp.105-6.33 Oehlke, p. 224.34 Fricke, p. 107.

Art. the Role of Mellefont in Miss Sara Sampson

Documents

Transcript of Art. the Role of Mellefont in Miss Sara Sampson