I have badly arranged my life; I do every thing for becoming prematurely
stupid. I would gladly abandon “the European beef,” which Hegel’s
phantasy presents as so much better than the American, and I could
almost wish to live near the weak inanimate crocodiles (which, alas!
measure 25 feet). Pp. 442–444, are certainly made more palatable to me
by our noble friend.
31.
HUMBOLDT TO VARNHAGEN.
BERLIN, _October 4th, 1837_.
You delight sometimes in arresting fleeting events, and in preserving
what the winds usually carry away. I therefore send you, dear friend,
the little speech, which the papers have published in such a mutilated
form. The sense of it will please you, although its neglected style
might be better. _Political_ Hanover I found, as you supposed; and
private conversations with King Ernest, which at the same time express
wrath and fear, confirm the view. Leist of Stade with his report, which
lasted five hours, has lately done harm by his flattery.
Yours,
A. HT.
Stieglitz, Wilhelm’s oldest friend, and who once saved his life in the
Leine river (my brother cried out to him, with unexampled stoicism; “I
die, but it does not matter,”) was to me a serious apparition of a
ghost. The effect of his spirit upon me is uncomfortable.
32.
HUMBOLDT TO VARNHAGEN.
SUNDAY, _October 22d, 1837_.
_Six o’clock_, A. M.
I find after a week’s residence in Potsdam, which has very much
discouraged me, your amiable souvenir. Receive, revered friend, this
very evening, my warmest thanks; you have praised me for my most
cherished aim, which is, that I may not become a fossil, as long as I
move, and cling to the belief, “that nature has put her curse upon
stagnancy and inertia.” Youth is the symbol of progress, and those, who
rule now (the Berlin world’s elephants) sont des momies en service
extraordinaire.
Good night,
A. HUMBOLDT.
33.
HUMBOLDT TO VARNHAGEN.
BERLIN, TUESDAY, _November 7th, 1837_.
The commencement of my letter is weak, the end of it more reasonable.
But you should not lose the dramatic effect of the whole.
What you ask, my dear friend, is very perilous, for the question is not
about my feelings, but about a family who anxiously _interpret_. The
more striking and spirited your delineation is, particularly p. 10–15,
(“He started from ideas.”... “That which many deny to him entirely.”)...
it impresses me uncomfortably, the more because it is in so short an
essay, and because it would appear less harsh in the description of a
whole life which was, in a literary and political point of view, not
unimportant. But this more complete description is impossible now;
therefore, my wish is incessantly to secure his renown by the
publication of his literary works. To leave out anything, or to alter
anything in this fine essay of yours, would rob it both of its charm and
vigor. You have written the whole in the noblest mood; but there are
points (Reineke Fuchs, the relation to Frau von Humboldt), which it is
not pleasant to allude to just now. Since you only demand of me to
enumerate individual impressions, I will give you these. Often they are
merely doubts. P. 5: “Foreign to abstract thinking.” The term
“Conservative philosophy” points, I believe, to Kant, to whom he adhered
most. He just believed that metaphysics, ante-Hegelian, had been the
chief study of his youth. I only wished a more decided expression. P. 6:
“In the proper sense not productive.” Philosophy of language according
to entirely new views, genius of antiquity, treating of history, deep
understanding of poetry—in all these branches he produced nothing that
was not of importance. P. 8: “Style all ice;” make it somewhat milder.
You do it yourself (p. 30), where the word “warms.” P. 13: “Thus the
call is soon decided, and the name is Mephistopheles or Reineke.” One
would wish the two significant names left out, since all is said before
in the happiest, liveliest style. “Mephistopheles” reminds one of Duke
Charles.
P. 14. The question about tender feeling, and the saying of Talleyrand,
which I did not know before, and which can have a sense only by
secondary relations of political irresolution, are not agreeable.
“C’était un des hommes d’état dont l’Europe, de mon temps n’en a pas
compté trois ou quatre,” was an expression heard from Talleyrand.
P. 15. “What many denied to him entirely,” very ingenious and fine. Old
Princess Louise said of you: “You are most to fear when defending.”
P. 18. My brother often narrated that Stieglitz saved him; but those
words, which would have sounded vain-glorious coming from his lips, I
only just now learned from Stieglitz. They are very characteristic and
true. Therefore, I wished only an explaining word, to prevent
misunderstanding.
P. 23. That he admired Rahel infinitely, is very, very true!
P. 28. “Constitutional principles.” If you ever make use of these
sheets, my dear, please add, at any rate: “Although he afterwards, in
other essays, pressed in the most distinct manner the necessity of a
general representative constitution.” This limitation is necessary. I
myself had in my hands his plan for a constitution, and for the mode of
election, and he died with these ideas.
P. 31. In place of “avarice,” say too great economy.
I read once more, with more peace of mind. I consider this your best
effort.
Pp. 6, 7, 10–12! 13–20, 24–27, 30!! all—almost all; and you have treated
with infinite consideration those things which you yourself, here and
there, hardly approved of.
“Il n’y a rien de maudit,” said the great painter, Gérard, “que de
consulter la famille sur la ressemblance du défunt. Il y a de quoi se
prendre, telle est leur exigeance! Ils auraient fait bon marché du
parent vivant.” Thus you will speak of me. I now ask myself, at the
close, whether I am not depriving the brother whom I loved so tenderly
and so _watchfully_, of a great renown, by asking you in the beginning
not to print your article?
Certainly _I would deprive him of renown_, for who will ever write of
him so very truly and eloquently. Therefore, what I wish to sacrifice,
what I dare to beg, is so trifling, so easy to change with, your
versatility of style! It refers to the few lines, which I underlined,
pp. 13 and 14, Rahel’s opinion, pp. 14 and 15, not included; for she
always is mild and just and charming.
Take my warmest, most heartfelt thanks, my revered friend! Do not answer
me. I shall call on you to-morrow morning, about twelve o’clock.
Yours,
A. HUMBOLDT.
34.
BERLIN, _June 9th, 1838_.
I am very happy, revered friend, that I can offer to you as a present
the only volumes of the great Russian poet hitherto published. Shall I
come to you to-morrow, Sunday, at one o’clock, that my eyes may see the
beautiful eyes which have enticed you (for our literary benefit) into
the Slavonian lingual labyrinth?
I called twice at Mr. K.’s; but, as he was not in, I left cards.
Moreover, I wrote him a tender letter, with offers for Petersburg
(concerning his journey to Geneva)—but I have not heard a word from him
since. Such conduct in a young man, who without me would still sit in
Orenburg as a Cossack clerk, is difficult to understand.
Most gratefully yours,
A. HT.