Don’s brother (Brother Don) has a Spurs season ticket; worse yet, he uses it to go and watch them. This notwithstanding (seamlessly assumes the first person), I am relatively fond of him but I can honestly say in the 50 plus years in which we have both been around, not once have I thought of jumping into bed with him.
Tricky Dickie Wagner on the other hand, seems to have a more cavalier approach to the treacherous waters of incestuous relations. Do join me in a poorly researched romp through some musings as to why that might be.
[For West Ham scroll down but why not hang around here for a bit…?]
The scene was set in last week’s Post 6 . In Act 1 Die Valkyrie, there is a rapturous love scene between the twins Siegmund and Seiglinde set to some of the most glorious and uplifting music in the tetralogy. What is the point of it?
In the first opera, Das Rheingold, Wotan has made a bad contract which he resolves by paying the giants with the stolen gold, including the Ring. This however, presents a much greater problem and everything depends on the retrieval of the Ring. He can’t do it himself because it will take violent coercion and that goes against his own rule of law. So his big idea (last scene, Rhinegold), is to find/create someone to do the job for him. A hero, Siegmund. The tension between the independence of the hero and Wotan’s hidden guidance feeds into the next couple of operas.
The main narrative thrust of Act 1 Valkyrie is to ensure Siegmund gains the powerful sword, Nothung, that Wotan thrust into an ash tree years before. Wagner didn’t need a love affair with a married women to achieve that, let alone for the married women to be the hero’s twin sister Sieglinde. He found certain hints in the mythology but nothing essential. So I wonder why Wagner felt this was necessary.
The Freudians would have us believe that all us little boys, latently lust after our mothers and resent our fathers as rivals. We spend our lives trying to escape that guilt and punish ourselves with castration fantasies (this literally occurs in Wagner’s final opera, Parsifal). Can’t say this really strikes a chord with me but that seems to be the theory.
In The Wagner Complex, Tom Artin talks of the sword representing the father’s penis and the tree the mother’s vagina. The thrusting of the sword into the tree is therefore the intercourse of the hero’s parents. In the absence of the father, the incest guilt wains and the mother being displaced by the sister, the incest occurs with her. Sieglinde, product of same parents is comparatively passive in this theory but lets leave that.
Before Mr Artin gets annoyed, I am not a scholar of psychoanalysis and may have got the wrong end of the sword but that’s the gist as I took it.
Wagner’s parentage is ambiguous. He did not know his natural father, Carl Friederich Wagner, who died shortly after he was born. His mother took her young family from Leipzig to Dresden and into the arms of the journeyman actor Ludwig Geyer whom she married and whom the young Wagner considered his father. Geyer is rumoured to be the natural father and so the journey might have occurred pre-Carl Frederich’s death and because he discovered the boy was not his. Wagner would have no first hand memory of this but he would hear the rumours and know he is the product of an unsuccessful marriage.
Geyer also dies too soon with RW aged 8, so marriage and fathers have disappointed twice. Wagner’s own first marriage was a disaster and he was brazenly adulterous. There are no successful marriages in The Ring Cycle.
It is safe to say that Wagner’s relationship with his mother was complex. He yearned in vain for her love but she was often distant emotionally and physically and Wagner transferred his (the Freudians may say Oedipul), affections and needs to his elder sister Rosalie.
Free love. Queue this side only.
As a young man, Wagner was attracted to the Young Germany movement of the 1830’s. Influenced by utopian socialists, it rejected the church dominated, restricted society of the post-industrial revolution German principalities. It encouraged free thinking, separation of church and state, feminism and the incorporation of some Romantic ideas into practical society. It advocated free love; marriage and the nuclear family being artificial church imposed mores.
Wagner was a student of philosophy, if no philosopher. Prior to his discovery of Schopenhauer in his mid forties his prime philosophical influence was Feuerbach, “the breathlessly optimistic apostle of secular humanism”1. Feuerbach rejected Christianity and other God centred religion. He considered that reference to the divine was a convenient means of dealing with abstract and elevated human qualities. ” Feuerbach maintained that when we speak of the nature and existence of God, we are confusedly trying to imagine certain admirable qualities in substantial form. So, for example, to say that “God is loving” or “God is love” is really just an indirect (and muddled) way of saying that “love is God”—which in turn simply is to say that love is divine, or of transcendent worth and importance.”2
For Feuerbach, there was no limit to human achievement when driven by the most elevated and purest of human emotion- love. Whilst he wasn’t so naively optimistic to say All You Need is Love, he felt we are at our best as a result of loving interaction with others and society should be configured so that love may flourish unrestrained.
As if to appeal particularly to Wagner, music held special appeal for Feuerbach, (as Wagner would also discover with Schopenhauer), who thought that through music, man could elevate to a higher transcendental plane.
So philosophically and if we believe the Freudians, psychologically, Wagner was not wedded to wedlock, nor to “unnatural” fetters upon love in its various forms.
Lets hastily return to safer ground; the plot. Das Rhinegold we recall was about strong but fallible men, weak women and rules. Bad things happen if you break the rules. Alberich and Wotan both separately steal the gold, Wotan creates his powerful stronghold, Valhalla , built by male giants. The clever male Loge is expected to think of a solution to the big problem.
In the female camp, the Rheinmaidens are passive and superficial. Freia, goddess of either youth or love (Don says both), is traded like a pawn in a male contract. Love literally being traded for power. I conveniently ignore Erda as whilst passive (and certainly so in Götterdammering), she doesn’t quite fit the type
Which brings us to Fricka. Her role seems to be to complain from stage left to little effect, to be barren and to be shallow in her thinking. Not only is she the wife of the Wotan the most significant character but she is the ineffectual goddess and protector of marriage and fidelity. Wotan meantime, wanders off for trysts with other women, with whom we later learn he has begot a dozen or so children.
Then we come to Die Valkure. We are no longer in the heavens but on earth, with real people. The coal face so to speak. From the off we relate to Siegmund and Sieglinde. We don’t yet know they are twins and neither do they. We learn that her marriage is forced and wrong.
Love sweeps in. Mere rules evaporate in its white heat. It cares little for marriage; incest is just another bourgeois rule. There’s no analysis of right and wrong, there’s just Love.
And I think therein lies the point. If power is not the answer to the big question, might love be? The tetralogy continues that exploration.
A linesman’s lack of attention is all that stood between us and five wins on the bounce. Was so proud of my team and the magnificent travelling army. Much to Little Don’s frustration, I have curtailed the away day travel in his gcse year, especially (whisper it) as we are hoping for additional Wembley day(s) out.
As we prepare for Chelsea we look in such good shape. The best second goalie around. Ogbonna looks to have completely settled. I expect Reid to join him against Chelsea. Solid. Antonio will move back into midfield to scare them witless. The rest of midfield speaks for itself. Up front, whilst I don’t see a champions league grade natural goal scorer, there’s lots of good options.
Mrs Don and I were at Stamford Bridge last time we won in 2003 and there’s been precious little hope since. I don’t expect to win today or even get a draw but I love our attitude that we are in every game to win it; home and away. That attitude will take us far and in style. I am confident we will score every game so we have to concede at least two to lose and we don’t do that too often and when we do, we still quite often get a result.
The Don is sanguine about Noble’s non-selection for England. Of course he deserves his chance but one could argue the same for Drinkwater had it gone the other way. Even with claret and blue glasses, Noble is not a shoe-in for England. Beginning of the season I thought he may struggle to get into WHU midfield. He’s been brilliant for us; long may that continue and that’s enough for Don. Apologies for that balanced view.
Am getting increasingly unsettled at how few games left at Boleyn. The brilliance of the football is in direct contrast to how I feel inside. I am excited about the shiny new stadium but this feeling is not great. My consolation is we could not have wished for a better last season.
Looking forward to Chelsea. They will need to score at least twice to beat us and I am optimistic of at least a point.
If you have been, thanks for listening.