Another meditation on Das Erdbeben in Chili: Heinrich von Kleist and the work of the reader

German Quarterly, The, Spring, 2008 by Amanda Norton

Das Erdbeben in Chili (1807), like so many of Heinrich von Kleist's eerily fascinating texts, has been read and reread from a multitude of theoretical angles with reliance upon countless schools of thought. One of the principal elements of this work is the invitation to search for truth and meaning in both the plot of the story and the form of the text itself. Indeed John Ellis writes that the work's central problem is interpretation and that "this is because the point in the story lies not in the meaning of the events themselves but in the attempts made by the narrator and the characters to give them meaning" (37). The text asks mystifying questions at every turn and these questions often prove vexingly unanswerable. Norbert Altenhofer addresses this riddle-like quality of the story and its provenance. He writes:

   Der Text als Ratsel, das Leben als unverstandliches Buch, die
   Auslegung als unendliche Aufgabe: In diesem Problembewusstsein
   treffen sich der Schriftsteller Kleist und der Hermeneut
   Schleiermacher. Hinter dem poetischen Skandalon steht das Skandalon
   einer Hermeneutik, die Wahrheit nicht mehr durch Offenbarung
   gesichert sieht, Missverstehen als das selbstverstandlich Gegebene
   betrachtet und "Verstehen" zu einer die Momente historischer
   Rekonstruktion und divinatorische Konstruktion integrierenden, nie
   abzuschlieissenden Tatigkeit erklart, die in der Bemuhung um den
   Sinn des Werkes zugleich ihren eigenen Sinn produziert. (53)

Characters, the narrator, the reader, and perhaps even the author search for information and meaning; this process is visible not only in the complex and surprising events and relationships in this story but also in the strange moments of emptiness when the text seems deliberately to be withholding information and hiding meaning.

There are many instances in which Das Erdbeben seems to be taunting the reader about the myriad things he does not know or cannot fully understand. Inserted among the (already sometimes cryptic) statements that are made explicitly are the suggestions of those that are not. These mysterious moments of intimation are the spaces in the text that implore the reader to remember that there are always many sides to every story. Kleist reminds us that this fact is often overlooked in literature as well as in life. He also reminds us that multiple interpretations of the same event can give rise to all sorts of misunderstandings, great and small, and to subsequent injustices, real or simply perceived. In this story, Kleist also emphasizes another unpleasant realization: that misinterpretations of an ambiguous or incomplete set of facts can have negative--even disastrous--consequences for the characters involved.

Because so many elements of Das Erdbeben in Chili clearly cry out for interpretation, it seems not overly hubristic to imagine that one might produce an unusual but not implausible reading of certain puzzles in the story and thereby accentuate some of the story's thematic features. Thus I will propose an interpretation of some of the odd allegiances, utterances and relationships that emerge in the story after the earthquake has upturned the lives of the residents of Santiago. I will argue that the traditional understanding of the central family structure of Jeronimo, Josephe and Philipp is not as sound as it seems. I will argue more specifically that the paternity of Philipp, and thereby the past actions of Josephe, cannot be determined definitively. Other scholars have presented similar claims (Clouser, Fischer, Lorenz, Thayer (2)) although generally in the context of larger arguments about ideas such as heroism or the relative strength or weakness of patriarchal systems. I believe that the ambiguities surrounding the issue of Philipp's paternity serve another purpose in the story: by calling into question many of the assumptions made by the crowd--assumptions that cause great pain and suffering--they reinforce for the reader the difficulty of interpretation, of reading in both a literal and a figurative sense. This aspect of the reader's experience--exhilarating and frustrating at once--is a major feature of Das Erdbeben as well as of many other works by Kleist.

After the joyful reunion of Josephe, Jeronimo and the tiny Philipp on the bank of a river, the family finds a makeshift camp of other survivors of the great catastrophe. Josephe is approached by a well-dressed man with a baby who asks her, "ob sie diesem Wurme, dessen Mutter dort unter den Baumen beschadigt liege, nicht auf kurze Zeit ihre Brust reichen wolle" (150). The scene that follows this seemingly innocent question is one of misunderstanding between Josephe and the man that is never quite explained. Kleist writes:

   Josephe war ein wenig verwirrt, als sie in ihm einen Bekannten
   erblickte; doch da er, indem er ihre Verwirrung falsch deutete,
   fortfuhr: es ist nur auf wenige Augenblicke, Donna Josephe, und
   dieses Kind hat, seit jener Stunde, die uns alle unglucklich
   gemacht hat, nichts genossen; so sagte sie: "ich schwieg--aus einem
   andern Grunde, Don Fernando; in diesen schrecklichen Zeiten weigert
   sich niemand, von dem, was er besitzen mag, mitzuteilen." (150)