REVIEWS

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 74, Issue 150, 27 June 1931, Page 2 (Supplement)

REVIEWS

‘ BISMARCK, THE TRILOGY OF A FIGHTER,” by Emil Ludwig. (Put ; uam), p.p. 404. 11 After Bismarck’s death in 1898 only two of the three volumes of his memoirs were published. This limitation was agreed to in deference to the wishes of his heirs, although, under the written agreement which existed, the whole work might have appeared at that time. It was feared that the third volume, which dealt with the dismissal of the Chancellor and the character of Kaiser Wilhelm 11., might, cause undesirable controversy, and for this reasoq the German nation were then deprived of first-hand information of great importance about their rulers. The publishers had announced that they would issue the third volume on the death of the Kaiser and when he suffered political death in 1918, and a great change had taken place in the views generally held about him. that printed jt. Thereupon, the Kaiser, from his home in Holland, prevented its publication by claiming copyright in certain unpublished letters, written by him to Bismarck in his own hand, which formed part of the book and were legally his property. i Bismarck, ten years after his death I and twenty-eight years after his fall from power, was once more prevented from revealing the truth and justifying his position. At this juncture Herr Emil Ludwig read the forbidden volume. The embargo seemed to him absurd, and the need for enlightening the German people urgent. He therefore used the material supplied by this volume, and also by other memoirs which had appeared meanwhile, for the composition of a drama in three acts entitled ‘‘Dismissal—A Fragment of History.” The indirect object of this play was to open the eyes of his fellow-country-men to the close connection between the fall of Bismarck and the causes of the World War The Kaiser again intervened from Holland and endeavoured to stop the production of the play, claiming that he, as a living person, should not be re presented on the stage, and, moreover, that the proposed representation was untrue and unfair, in the litigation which followed, however, Herr Ludwig w’on his case on appeal, the Court deciding that his representation was in all respects historically accurate and absolutely objective. The play was accordingly performed all over Germany. .... Encouraged by his success, Herr Ludwig shortly afterwards wrote two other plays in which he unfolded the earlier part of Bismarck’s history, and gave a view' of his hero which differs in essential parts from the conception of the Iron Chancellor with which we have become familiar. These plays, entitled respectively, King and People 1862-1864, and Union, 1870. have been, and continue to be, frequently performed on the German stage. With 11 Dismissal. 1890,” they constitute a Trilogy of which the English version is presented in this volume.” The foregoing are extracts from the publisher’s preface and provide an adequate foreword to the plays themselves: King and People. (1862-1864.) The plot of this play I will not give here, but content myself with indicating its import. Indeed, the plot does not exist for, instead of developing to a denouement, it proceeds to a frustration. Roon engineered the calling of Bismarck to the Chancellorship. His bete noir was Lasalle. Lasalle was the aristocratic Jew playing at democracy. He had political insight, up to a point, but he drank in the nectar of popularity, he conceived of himself as the “man of power.” Instead of casting in his lot with the aristocracy as did Disraeli he engineered to lead the proletariat. Converted to Socialism by Karl Marx’s “IDas Capital,” he perceived in Bismarck the man who w r as at once his ally and his enemy. Karl Marx predicted the development of society upon hard definite lines, the possessing class and the dispossessed. The elimination of the Liberals was, therefore, a desirable development for Lasalle and so he counselled Bismarck to grant universal suffrage and so “dish the whigs.” Ludwig portrays Bismarck as seeing right through Lasalle and of assessing the situation with truer evaluations than Lasalle. Should these two men have aligned opposing forces in sufficient strength to have made the one the anvil to the other’s hammer? Subsequent history indicates that such w'ould not have been the case, but, alas, that trial of genius of different kinds never came about for Lasalle became infatuated with the red-haired head of ‘ Helene von Donniges, which brought him a bullet from her fiance, Janko von Rakowitz. His news came to Bor lin on the night that Bismarck’s life was attempted, after he had dissolved the Landtag of Prussia and indicated his intention of carrying on without its aid. Union. (1870.) This play of line acts is more vital than “King and People.” The plot is more vital, the characters more incisive. Roon is there, of course, but that enigmatical man Molke, the man who saw more than he said, stands upon the stage, always apart, always confining himself to a few sentences which, nevertheless, mean so much. The foil to this character is the Emperor Napoleon 111., for the burden of this play is the achievement of German unity by the Franco-German War of 1870. The first scene is set in Paris on July 12, 1870, and we are introduced to the diplomatic miscalculations of the French, and Ludwig presents to us a picture of a war that almost failed to come off. Had the Emperor not been a sick man he may have succeeded in repelling his bad counsellors, but tie listless invalid was no man for such a crisis and especially so when married to the spirited Empress Eugene, lb saw through Bismarck’s game and Molke’B plans. After Sedan the sick man is almost relieved. He realised that ho is on the way to “England’s green and pleasant land” once more. The situation within Paris during the siege provides the material for Ihc fourth act and we see Gainbetta proclaiming the Republic and Thiers treading his philosophical step across the stage, internal strife playing itself out before the face of the invader. What a tragedy this scene contains. The German princlings provide the light comedy of an ironic kind, which, how ever, has to give way to the coming of th- 1 French plenipotentiaries to sue for

{ peace and in these interviews the relaj lionship of the French and Germans ; finds terse expression. The play ends : with the fall of Paris. Dismissal. (1890. ■ 1 The dismissal of the Chancellor has formed one of the greatest controversy points of modern history. Bismarck made modern Germany. The London “Punch” hit the nail on the head when it published its famous cartoon “Dropping the Pilot.” It has rightly stuck in the minds of men. Bismarck was the pilot. His hand upon the tiller was essential, but the young man who tried to do sc much but had not the equipment for the task put that ship on the rocks. To-day the Empire is a talc that is told. Dismissal is a three act play and the locus is mainly in the Bisniaicxian household. The tide of democracy was rising in Germany and the Kaiser had enough intelligence to perceive it. What he could nut understand was the method of handling it. Eulenburg was singing in dulcet tones into the Emperor’s ear. The flatterer’s song was stimulating and especially when a political crisis was pending which shook the Kaiser’s coward heart. These influences combined with egotism of an abnormal kind carried the Kaiser to Bismarck’s home early in the morning and there the last scene but one was played out. It is to the credit of Ludwig who is a hero worshipper of Bismarck’s that he presents the Kaiser’s case with force and poise and point. After that interview Bismarck utters some prophetic remarks: “Whoever dares to fell my old giants may be crushed in their fall,” is one of them. Schulavlov conies too late for Bismarck to be able to renew the Russo-German Treaty. Bismarck’s famous reinsurance policy theerfore goes overboard. “1 must abandon the fate of my Empire to its hereditary Kaiser” is the last line of the play. He is back home in Pomerania from whence he started. But not the MY Empire. In these three plays the historian lays a heavy hand on the dramatist. Shakespeare in his historical plays had in view nought but the amusement of his audience. Ho was therefore able to use his material without the least regard for the truth. Ludwig wanted to reveal the truth as he himself saw it. It is not surprising, therefore, to find many an historic phrase which is remembered from biography and story in the text of these scenes and in none of these scenes does the truth seem violated. and the plays in their main thesis are accurate as far as this writer can perceive. For easy reading of the “high lights” of Bismarck’s great career this volume can be well commended. ‘ * THE HOLY CITIES OF ARABIA, ’ ’ by Eldon Rutter (Putnam), p.p. 594. Arabia, the mysterious country of the sons of Ishmayl and of the prophet Muhammad, was given great post-war prominence through the publicity given to the exploits of Colonel H. E. Lawrence. Thousands who never heard of. Palgrave, Burckhardt, Snouk-Hurgrouje, or mayhap read of Doughty’s “Arabia Deserts” without exploring that rich mine of information, were introduced by the journalese of Lowell Thomas and, later, by Lawrence himself to the amazing life in the wild gaunt deserts of the Holy Land of Islam. In 1928 Eldon Rutter published his well-nigh incredible work on his personal observations and adventures during a sojourn in Arabia. Messrs Putnam have brought out a one-volume edition with 25 excellent illustrations and 8 most informative maps. Among many travelbooks I have read in the last few years I have no hesitation in placing “The Holy Cities of Arabia” an easy first. The success of the Lawrence books was largely due to his mystic personality and the astounding adventures through which he passed. This volume has not the same popular appeal. The author has deliberately maintained a silence concerning himself, the meticulous training he must.have undergone to fit himself for the exacting demands the ad venture made on his knowledge of the language, the customs and the religious practices, and, in addition to these, the adoption of the spirit of Islam to such a degree as to be taken at his face value as a pilgrim fulfilling all the requirements of the hajj. Actually, this reticence makes the narrative all the more valuable because one’s attention is not unduly distracted from the main point of the narrative —the delineation of ihc country and its people. Mr Rutter wields a facile pen which never seems to fail, whether called upon to describe some scene in the desert or town, a religious rite or an incident in home-life, the topography of Mekka or the histo'ry of some person or custom. The narrative Hows smoothly forward from the view seen from a railway carriage window at Suez at midday on May 20, .1925, to over a year later, with the high peak of liodhwu slowly fading from view as the steamer swings round the sandy islet which protects the harbour of Yanbua. That the sojourn in Arabia was not without constant risk is evident time and again. There was the grave danger arising from the fact that the country was in a state of war, with the puritanical Wahhabis overrunning most of the country. The first crisis, however, came as a result of a quarrel with Abdulla and Jamil, the two men who were engaged to convey the author to Mekka as a pilgrim. At El Gahm they demanded more money, which Mi Rutter refused. “I will take it. by force from the dog,” Abdulla shrieked. “It is my hope to take his life. The dog! the Jew! the Nazrani!” There was a terrible menace in the final accusation. “The Christian is more hated throughout the Islamic world at the present time than is Iblis himself. The reason for this is doubtless that t!.c world is, in the present age, almost ent indy ruled by Christian powers —to the exclusion of the Muslimin. Yet in the Koran, chapter “l.’ho Table,’ it is writ ten: Verily ((_> Muhammad!) thou wilt find the nearest among them (i.e.. among mankind), in friendliness to the believers to be those who say, ‘Verily we are Christians.’ ’’ If. therefore, 1' Muslimin paid more attention to their sacred book, they should harbour a greater liking for the followers of the Christian form of religion than for the followers of any other save their own.” Mr Hutter managed, finally, to get rid of the two men by appealing to tin 1 shaykh of the village, who acted as arbitrator. Continued watch hud to be kept on speech and look and conduct lest the author should betray himself. This peril was brought to its highest pitch • luring an acute attack of fever while in Mekka itself. The mutterings of

delirium cuuld easily have brought about the most dire results. Then there is an incident during a special journey from El-Taif back to Mekka. A mer- • hunt was with the parly. “During the night he was groping about in the darkness, probably to find a [dace in which lo relieve himself, and was set upon by thieves and murdered.” Add to these the likelihood of being recognised by some acquaintance from Egypt. This actually happened in .Mekka itself, only buth parties were able to circumvent the calamitous issue. Nevertheless, it was soon noised abroad that there was an Englishman in the Holy City; but Mr Hutter so managed affairs that his presence, was made more secure. As a matter of fact, the handling of the incident was so skilful that many otherwise closed doors were opened. It was, for instance, through this that the author met Ibn Saud, the chief of the Wahhabis and the ruler of Arabia, in his own home and frequently conversed with him. During the. extensive period spent in -Mekka Mr Rutter lived near the Bab el Omra gate of the Great Mosque as the [laying guest of an Arab named Abdurrahman. His arrival could hardly be called heruir, for he was attired as a pilgrim in nothing but two towels and a pair of sandals. “Dressed in the ihrani, 1 was shivering with cold; 1 was half starved and unwashed; L had had very little rest for more than a fortnight. . . . but 1 was filled with a vehc ment thankfulness as 1 realised that .1 was in Mekka at last. Discomfort was forgotten as my camel carried me down the tortuous lane, into the heart of an old Aral) city.” Treated in most places as almost uno of the family and par taking freely of the open-handed Ara bian hospitality, he was able to observe constantly and closely all the habits of the people. He entered into all their religious rites and ceremonies, fulfilling in every particular the observances of a pilgrim and visiting all the places of interest. We arc thus given a most realistic description of the people in all phases of their life and the various practices of Mohammedanism in the cities of its birth and early propagation. From intimate knowledge the author has been able to give us illuminating and fascinating chapters on “Preliminary Rites of th<- Pilgrimage,” “The Mekkan’s Daily Life,” “Manners and Customs of the Mekkans,” “Women and Slaves,” as well as equally informative and readable ones in regard to topography, geography, history and law. (To be Continued)