The innocent fool and the secret love

"In 1887, only five years after its premiere, Nietzsche asked in On the Genealogy of Morality "¿what imported to Wagner that manly (oh, so little manly) 'rural guilelessness', that poor devil, that rustic boy called Parsifal?". Since then, have not been few the voices that have indicated –with undisguised malignancy– the sexual ambiguity that wraps this controversial title. The numerous loose ends around this question permits us to present the reader the previous question in another way: Could really Wagner conceive Wagner a gay Parsifal?"

With this text began the article The innocent fool and the secret love, published in the monthly magazine Audio Clásica in October of 2008. I've been concerned with the topic of homosexuality in Parsifal since my student years in the conservatory, as almost with all Wagner. It was by then when, putting two and two together, that I arrived to the conviction that it was not only possible that Wagner could conceive consciously a gay Parsifal, but what's more, the homosexuality of the character represented a central element of the plot, the necessary key for clear up all the contradictions and absurdities that habitually are attributed to this controversial masterpiece.

The article found some prominency when it was kindly reviewed by the music critic Blas Matamoro in a column in theABC newspaper cultural section titled Parsifalismos some months later. This column, nevertheless, summoned two arguments that reduce considerably the scope of the ideas summarized in it. The first of them refers to its supposed originality:

"In a thoughtful article ("The innocent fool and the secret love", Audio Clásica magazine), Rafael Fernández de Larrinoa examines again the theme of the homosexuality in the wagnerian Parsifal."

That is to say, as everything has been told about this theme, actually I do not say anything new.The second argument, nevertheless, alludes to a central question in this type of theories:

"To investigate the concrete sexuality of the fictitious characters is often a vain and complex task. They do not have a physical body but a symbolic one."

Given that these two reactions have been the most frequently among the connoisseurs with which I have had the opportunity to consult, I've devoted this site to develop my arguments in more detail that it was allowed to me within the limited space that was available to me in the magazine cited avobe, and to expose my ideas with greater clarity.

THE HOMOSEXUALITY IN PARSIFAL

It is true that the topic of the homosexuality in Parsifal (to read libretto) has been debated on numerous occasions since the premiere of the work, just as the article advanced:

"That part of the commentators that could only see in Wagner a prophet of the Nazism, returned from time to time the homosexual thread binding it with the anti semitic one: "It is possible to see Parsifal simply as a sick homoerotic fantasia in the nineteenth century style" (Charles Osborne), like a deeply inhuman show gloryfying an sterile male world whose ideals are a mixture of militarism and monasticism (Peter Wapnewski) or as a melancolic nightmare of aryan anxiety whose monastic homosexuality is not different to the comradeship of the troops of Ernst Röhm (Robert Gutman). "

The article refers briefly to other commentators as Claude Debussy, who in a 1903 article compiled in Debussy on music (Cornell University Press, 1977), displays his habitual irony when he writes:

"The environment [in Parsifal] is certainly religious, but why certain childlike voices exhibit so ambiguous tones? "

Or refers to the film director Hans-Jürgen Syberberg , who in that bewildered spectacle of his film version of the sacred stage play decides, without greater explanations, to award the protagonist role indistinctly to both a boy and a girl, which does not exactly mean that Syberberg understands Parsifal to be gay, but could have something to do with it.

In any case, the allusions to the homosexuality of Parsifal are in a minority among the cumbersome and abundant literature that has been inspired by this opera, and what is more important, at least as I know, they use to be formulated in a "negative", outlying form with regard to the main matter (any that it should be) and connected with interpretations that have little to do with the one defended in the article.

In general, the homosexual thesis has been formulated in contexts in which the work in question is interpreted in a protonazi key, and in which is given for fact that the homoerotic elements that come to the surface are present in an unconscious and repressed form, like a undeniable and decisive symptom of the fundamental defect of the wagnerian thoughtthat, according to these commentators, makes Wagner's ouvre an ideological monster. The homosexual thesis that I exposed in the article, on the contrary, makes homosexuality a central symbolic element, assumes a deliberated development on the side of the composer and connects it with an interpretation of the drama "in positive".

My knowledge on the aforesaid thesis about of Parsifal is not exhaustive. Because of it I ask the potential reader of these lines to make me know if he is aware of any known argument on this topic that I should not have neglected, or at least, I ask him to analyze it to clarify if it espresses the homosexual thesis in the same terms as I do.

THE SYMBOLIC HOMOSEXUALITY

In our times, in which the main tendency in the gay world it is "to come out of the closet" and in which is frequent to nominate the homosexuality of personalities of the present and of the past times, is normal to receive the theory about the homosexuality of a fictional character (as for example, Hergé's Tintin) just as a mere game without any possibility to affect the real meaning and substance of it.

Nevertheless, is not true, as Matamoro argues in his column, that stating the homosexuality of a fictional character should always be an sterile task, especially if certain factors are given.

UNDER CONSTRUCTION (CORRECTING ONLINE TRANSLATION)

However it is not true, as pointed out in his column Matamoro who postulate the "homosexuality" a fictional character is always an impossible task, especially if there are certain factors. And because fewer people have no fictitious "a physical body but symbolic", but precisely for that. But in the case of certain fictional characters we would be talking, in any case, homosexuality a "symbolic" is not to elucidate, such as Tintin, from whether their conduct may reveal a homosexual consciousness . The fictitious beings are not aware, but have a "symbolic body," and because it can determine whether homosexuality is part of its symbolic structure.

Is this how we should understand this short (for the usual limitations of space) point in the article:

"Homosexuality in Parsifal symbolically explains why a couple has been so unprepared to resist the seductive charms of an expert with the magical arts was irresistible to any man, is also the spiritual counterpart of the physical castration of Klingsor, who alone precisely because of his self, he had been able to resist and subdue the witch. "

In this paragraph I attempt to summarize that specifically exists in Parsifal a symbolic structure that supports the thesis:

• 1. On the one hand, Amfortas and Kundry two characters are "cursed." In perfect symmetry, each with a prophecy that announces the end of his curse.

  2. The prophecy of Amfortas is repeated numerous times throughout the opera and even carries an associated Leitmotiv: "Durch Mittleid wissend , del reine Tor ; harre sein , den ich erkor ." ( "Sapient by compassion, the innocent fool, looked for the chosen one").

  3. The prophecy of Kundry is cited once, but has the same structural importance. Occurs when Klingsor says "Wer dir dir trotzte , löste trotzte, Lost dich dich frei" (" Whoever stands [your powers of seduction], will release you ").

  4. As we know, Parsifal the character is referring to two prophecies.

If deeper into the prophecy of Kundry, we find that it is a special, highly prized in the fantastic stories: prophecy impossible. It's the sort of prophecy that the witches in Macbeth to spend their last meeting: One should fear Macduff, but nobody kidded by other women he can do damage, and its power will end only when the forest of Birnam moves. Finally, something unexpected (Macduff was kidded by his mother, but was removed from the womb by cesarean section, the rebels of the forest of Birnam with branches of trees to believe the sentinels of the forest Macbeth actually moves) the impossible becomes possible.

Thus, we can go further in the symbolic structure of the prophecy:

• 1. The prophecy concerning the release of Kundry is sort of impossible Kundry is desperate to hear as she is, by definition, irresistible. The failure in fulfilling his prophecy was confirmed when releasing Amfortas even the most noble of the Knights of the Grail, won fell into his arms: "Fluch meinem verfallen alle mit mir!" ( "All are victims of my curse").

  2. But there is more. In fact, there has been a man who could resist her charms, and this is Klingsor. It is precisely its ability to resist the lure of Kundry which has given her power over the witch, "Weil einzig Einziger an an mir mir deine deine Macht ... nichts Macht nichts ... vermag ." ("For me just before your power [of seduction] ... is futile ").

  3. However, giving it a Klingsor this unique capacity to resist the powers of Kundry is being castrated. Klingsor physical castration provides a key from which to deduce why the young Parsifal is able to resist the charms of the sorceress. The symmetry of the symbolic structure allows us to infer the existence Parsifal in some kind of castration that may not be real but symbolic.

  4. If the castration of Klingsor allows enslave Kundry, Parsifal is allowed to release it.

HOMOSEXUALITY IDEALIZED

The above shows that it is possible to express the homosexuality of a fictional character in symbolic terms, without recourse or a case analysis of their conduct or the inquiry into the biography of the author. However, "homosexuality" is not exactly a synonym for "symbolic castration" for a little while to think this is one option among the possible less extravagant (¿impotence?, Asexual?, Etc.).. Anyway, let this issue aside for now.

What interests us now is to discuss why homosexuality is an attribute capable of being idealized (used as a symbol), so we place ourselves in the cultural coordinates of the time. In this case suggested the following paragraph in the article:

"It is enormously significant that the check given to homosexual archetype Parsifal by Wagner responds to spread by the pioneers in protecting the dignity of homosexuals in Germany from the 1860s (Ulrichs, Krafft-Ebing, Addington Symonds, etc.), And whose two main characteristics are exercising a quasi-Platonic love, the most exclusive of "gross" of physical love and commitment to serve society, the absence of family commitments. "

Here we refer to the fact that the existing debate about homosexuality in Europe occurred in Wagner's highly idealized terms. Unlike what happens today, where what matters is doing what and with whom you do, the behaviors were not (and much less sex) which came under discussion at that time, but the meanings of homosexuality itself: Both the intrinsic ( "man with feminine soul" of Karl Heinrich Heinrich Ulrichs ) and extrinsic, that is, its possible meaning in society (the "second form of human love elevated to emerge and take its seat at the service of Humanity" by John Addington Addington Symonds ).

A highly idealized concept of homosexuality as it is likely to integrate it into a symbolic structure, allowing its relationship with the type dualities man / woman, eros / caritas, instinctive / learned, etc.., Dualities, on the other hand, are fundamental in the symbolic universe Wagnerian. Specifically, in Parsifal, homosexuality serves a very specific role within the overall structure of the drama: it symbolizes the resistance "natural" (inborn, intuitive, etc.). The temptation futile resistance against the "moral" (learned, forced etc.) Knights of the Grail. But we'll leave this topic aside for now.

THE EROS / CARITAS EXCISION

Having established that there is a symbolic structure within which Parsifal could refer to homosexuality (which, for now, we have called "spiritual castration"), then to contextualizethe concept of "homosexuality" in the nineteenth coordinates, it is checked the role played by this supposed "homosexuality" within the overall structure, which we must clarify before. This section is the most widely sought within the article. First, it refers to the most important structural element of the whole opera, the division eros / emoticons:

"The enchanted garden of Klingsor exhibits, on the other hand, the obvious parallels with the Venusberg Tannhäuser. In this romantic drama, 1845 Wagner presented the first theme of his symbolic universe Christians borrowed from medieval literature, but very puritan life in Europe of the nineteenth century: the rift between profane love (eros) and the sacred love (caritas). In Tannhäuser, this is expressed in a fairly rudimentary, tearing through the protagonist against the love for two women antithetical: the chaste Elisabeth and the goddess Venus, sovereign Venusberg.

The eros / caritas excision is again the core structure of Parsifal, but it deployed through a greater variety of symbols with significant levels of very diverse meaning. "

The concept of excision is a fundamental structural element of Romanticism that was already fully expressed in terms of philosophy and poetry since the time of the Phenomenology of Spirit (1807) of Hegel and Faust (1808) of Goethe. The excision is part of a structure consisting of three successive elements: 1) The initial unit, 2) the breaking of this unit due to some "original sin", 3) restoration "dialectic" of the unit, this means not merely a return to square one, or the victory of one of the splinter in relation to the other, but the overcoming of duality and access to a more advanced stage of awareness.

The article explains that although the concept of division plays an important role in Wagnerian music-dramas such as The Ring of the Nibelung -, only in Christian dramas(Tannhäuser, Lohengrin and Parsifal) this split is expressed primarily through the duality of Eros / emoticons:

"It is important to note that the distinction between eros and caritas, essential in the Wagnerian dramas Christians, there is, strictly speaking, the pagans (the Ring, Tristan). There, erotic love and compassion (= caritas) and are a the same thing, and invariably leads one to the other. The conflict in the Ring, for example, was the opposition of the powers represented by the law [or power], and love. But this love was complete (and erotic compassion at a time) all the characters in "lovers" of this saga, from Siegmund Brühnhilde up. In the Christian dramas, however, the erotic love torn from within by those who feel it is a guilty love. Excision eros / caritasgenerated in Tannhäuser as Amfortas and Kundry, an unbearable awareness of sin and guilt. "

THE PAYSAGE MORALISÉ

To our knowledge by structuralism, symbolic codes are not expressed through speeches diachronic (linear or speeches, that is arranged in a logical chain using temporary or causal) but via synchronous constellations or "structures" (refer the reader to my article Lévi-Strauss in Beverly Hills, where a graphical expound some basic structural concepts). The eros /caritas excision in Parsifal is expressed through many symbols, but one that is all the argument and characterizes the best fundamental conflict is undoubtedly the paysage moralisé constitutes the backdrop for the work.

"The symbol consists of a paysage moralisé two scenarios representing two symbolic moral choices mutually exclusive: Monsalvat, the castle of the Grail, the realm ofemotions that can only access those that are willing to resign themselves to serve the homeless and needy, and the garden of Klingsor, kingdom of eros that swallows come to making slaves of their infernal delights. This scenario represents a double-torn humanity, first, to achieve a fair and caring society (brotherhood Grail), while the other, being held up these aspirations, beset by a selfish need to try to contain and deviate from it (the garden of Klingsor). At this level, Parsifal is what we might consider the conflict of any religious doctrine essential but also, any utopia. "

In a symbolic narrative as it is Parsifal, a structure is not normally expressed by developing "psychological" of the characters, or through the specification of their motivation or any of their mental processes, but through a series of actions or attributes representing time and again, but in different ways, the same structure. Because of this, and despite the fact that the structures are very abundant in Parsifal symbolic, almost all of them end up in one form or another, referring to the division eros / caritas main

"The symbolic representation of the division does not stop here, but extends to a wide array of symbolic pairs that add new nuances to this utopia (Titurel / Klingsor, Amfortas / Kundry, cup / spear, etc.).."

FUNCTIONAL SYMBOLS

At this point, it should clarify some things concerning the symbols. Traditionally, and even now in popular culture, has seen them as individual and separated items . As summarized in Lévi-Strauss:

"Jung based his system on the study of symbols (the god, witch, tree, sword, etc..), The meanings attributed to stable throughout civilizations and cultures. As a result of this premise, Jung and his followers studied the presence of each symbol in the various mythologies, bringing its findings to be used in dictionaries for the interpretation of myths, but also of dreams, art or religion, among others.

Lévi-Strauss denied this kind of autonomy within the meaning of the symbols. According to French anthropologist, the meaning of a symbol depends on its position within a particular myth: a narrative element can play an important symbolic role in a story, take a completely different role in another, or completely inconsequential in a third.There isn't an a priori notion of what is and what can not be a symbol. On the contrary, any narrative elements to save significant relations of similarity or contrast with other elements in the narrative, can have a symbolic function. "

The structuralist interpretation of the symbols dismisses any knowledge "esoteric" about the meaning of the symbols before, as are the relationships that are symbols other (not the symbols themselves) units capable of generating linguistic meaning:

"Following the main tenet of structuralism de Saussurian, whereby the engine of meaning is the difference, Lévi-Strauss understood the myth as a linguistic system [...]. Thus, the analysis of a myth is but locating and extract the significant elements of a story, according to organize these relationships of similarity and contrast, and analyze the resulting structure. "

Thus, while the functional interpretation of the symbols shrink its meaning at the level of common language (and producing meanings that lie at the level of the common language), the structural interpretation of the symbols that these are in a language in a way " superior, but more simple, abstract and universal, whose units of meaning are not really symbols, but the structures that shape them.

KUNDRY'S CURSE AND RELEASE

Continuing with our analysis, we come to the character of Kundry, whose structure is illustrated by a breakaway unequivocally:

• 1. Kundry falls to the evil laugh of Jesus Christ while he was carrying the cross at Golgotha. This stage is repeated when Kundry laughs again to seduce Amfortas and Klingsor that allows usurp his spear and the wound inflicted. His guilt condemnation (in the manner of the Flying Dutchman) to live forever in a state of despair.

  2. Kundry's curse/excision is expressed through a split into two personalities (and images) opposing (in the manner of Dr. Jeckyll and Mr. Hyde): One is an ugly woman who devotes all his might to redeem their fault seeking a remedy to cure the wound of Amfortas, on the other side is an irresistible beauty witch wizard Klingsor used to seduce and enslave the knights of the Grail, including Amfortas.

  3. Parsifal is able to break the curse that kept tied to the power of Klingsor Kundry, restores the unity of his personality and drive to Amfortas, the wound is healed by the spear.Its total release occurs when, through the Grail reach the coveted eternal rest.

In connection with this structure include several features:

• 1. Some stages of the structure are expressed in multiple ways: The curse stems from the episode before Christ, but is renewed every time you laugh at human misery, especially that of Amfortas. Su redención se produce dos veces. His redemption occurs twice.

  2. The various stages of the structure are disordered chronologically: A cause of division and the results are superimposed.

  3. There is no causal relationship between stages and others: It is impossible to deduce the characteristics of the division of Kundry from the event which caused it. There is noapparent explanation of why Parsifal succeeds redeem.

These characteristics show that neither the linearity nor the causal and temporal consistency are prerequisites in a symbolic story. It is precisely this that call into question the value of functionalist interpretations as to impose a system of symbols-the-grounds that are unrelated. The meaning of the stories come directly from the symbolic meanings expressed in the story, as well as relations of similarity and contrast that are established between them, but not their temporal or causal relationships.

KUNDRY, VENUS AND ELISABETH

If we look at the meanings, we see that Kundry represents a single character in the two female archetypes that we met in Tannhäuser. One Venus is the pagan goddess of earthly pleasures and sovereign of a magical kingdom that embodies the repressed fantasies of knights Grail. Unlike Venus, Kundry fulfills this role enforced by the power of Klingsor: more than a goddess, is a prostitute.

On the other hand embodies the virginal Elisabeth, although stripped of its sympathy and romantic aura. Antithesis of the penitent Kundry / physical aspect of Venus and detestable, is vilified and despised by the squires for their bad manners, even though it offers its valuable services to the Grail without demanding anything in return.

"We find, for example, the bipolar Kundry, a symbol of objectification of women in a male world, either as a sex object without a soul, or as penitent caste."

The example of freudian character is best to check how the repetition of a narrative structure within a symbol not only strengthens the main structure (in this case, the division eros/ caritas) but gives it new nuances: In this male world where sex is sin, the woman only has the option of subjecting (penitent Kundry) or rebellion (Kundry prostitute). Whether in a case such as in the other we are being alienated by an incomplete and insatrisfecho (hysterical).

La resolución de la escisión en este personaje es especialmente problemática. The resolution of this split personality is particularly problematic. Esto se debe al hecho de que, por razones dramáticas, su redención "real" (liberación al final del Acto II) se adelante todo un acto con respecto a su redención "simbólica" (muerte al final del Acto III). This is due to the fact that, for dramatic reasons, his redemption "real" (released at the end of Act II) is a forward spot with respect to its redemption "symbolic" (death to the end of Act III).Desde el punto de vista estructural, es un personaje al que ya no le queda nada más que hacer, y es por ello que el personaje queda vacío de contenido durante este acto (no canta) y se limita a cumplir un ascético rol cuyo significado ha sido ampliamente debatido, pero cuyas implicaciones estructurales consideramos secundarias. From a structural point of view, is a character who is no longer anything else to do, which is why the character is devoid of substance during this event (no singing) and merely fulfilling a role ascetic whose meaning has been widely discussed, but whose secondary structural implications.

AMFORTAS, TANNHÄUSER AND TRISTAN

Amfortas in his person also recreates the dramatic structure of the division, although in a vastly more sophisticated. On the one hand, the desperate Tannhäuser Act III, despised by himself and those around you because of your sins, and who will also be able to reach the divine acquittal through a crosier florido (in his case, the spear ):

"[Amfortas represents] the division as more specifically Judeo-Christian: the concept of sin (= fault), defined as awareness or internalization of the division and could be regarded as the true dark side of utopia. "

The comparison of the structures of Tannhäuser and Amfortas is very revealing. They give in to their forbidden desires in scenarios with strong sexual connotations and dreamlike, with a Venus and the other with Kundry. Subsequently convicted by their own, organized religion in any "official" one for himself Pope of Rome and the other by Titurel, founder of the order. In both cases, God "corrects" the error of his church / order and returns the favor in the sinner through a miracle, a divine emissaries and an intercessor, the crosier florido / pilgrims / Elisabeth, in one case and the spear / Parsifal-Kundry-Gurnemanz/Parsifal in another.