Spring Awakening, written by Frank Wedekind, is a German expressionist play depicting the role of taboo subject matter within a conservative society.
After reading the play, my initial reaction was a state of shocked, pensive silence. The play begins with a very subtle, indirect introduction of possible “scandalous” topics, such as women’s attire and the experience of “Manhood’s emotions” (an allusion to the male erection and sexual compulsions). However, as the play progresses, the plot evolves into startling circumstances involving rape, suicide
, and discussions with the dead. Although almost all of the events seemed to form a connection with each others, the progression of the plot was extremely choppy and ambiguous. The difference between one scene and the next was stark and each circumstance seemed to pile into completely havoc with minimal to no transition until the final scene of the play. I think the effect of the structure of the play helped Wedekind cover a plethora of tabooed topics, and I feel as though it conveyed a purpose as to why he wrote the play. The impression that I was left with after reading was that beyond creative expression, Wedekind wrote the play in order to shed light on subject matter that society must be able to discuss, when it doesn’t. Without discussion, the youth of said society is left in darkness, battling sensations and emotions that are too novelty to understand; and with this conjecture I agree.
Each theme that is spurred within the play, I feel, is a topic of discussion amongst adolescent and adults that needs to be said. Spring Awakening referred to subject matter such as pornography, rape, suicide, depression and mental health, and homosexuality. And I feel that Wedekind evoked through his play feelings of either concern or acceptance for those who are involved in these subjects, as well as criticism for those who ignored them and their assailants. Those who are victims of or involved in such acts were, and at times still are, depicted as shameful or frightening by society. However, Wedekind combats this with the events that occur in Spring Awakening. For example, two male students called Hanschen and Ernst reveal themselves to be homosexual after kissing each other. The scene where this occurs is carried in a way were feelings of joy and relief are evoked from the audience. The setting is rather calm, the two of them enjoying grapes at the edge of a vineyard, and they discuss their desire to live life by reaping as much pleasure as they can from the time that they’re allotted. Through this, Wedekind associated homosexuality with simple human pleasure, that should be enjoyed and not shamed if the tendency occurs. Although conservative values categorize homosexual men and women as unwanted, Wedekind’s depiction of homosexuality is calm, joyful, and accepting. Such a scene supports the idea that Wedekind used Spring Awakening as a way to show sympathy and tolerance for those that are unjustly expelled from society.
Hi Stella! I like your point that the tabooed topics depicted in this play must be discussed. With discussion, these topics become easier to deal with and we can better understand them, allowing us to begin to accept any outcasts created by lack of knowledge. I believe that today’s society is doing this very well, especially with the topic of homosexuality, as you stated, with the new legislation being put in place that allows homosexuals to be equals in today’s society.
I completely agree with you on the progression of the plot being “choppy and ambiguous”. I felt like crucial moments of the play (i.e. Wendla’s death scene) didn’t get enough stage time, if any, and it left me disoriented when the next scene switched time, place, and characters. While bits of plot relayed in each scene tied together in the end, some scenes (like the one of Hans with Venus) seemed out of place to me. While they matched the theme of repressed sexuality, I just don’t see how it furthered the plot. Still, I admire the progressiveness of the play and the writer’s boldness for putting it to paper and bringing it to stage.
I agree with you that Wedekind was smart to employ a very choppy structure; it allowed him to cover a plethora of different topics as opposed to only one or two. There were a lot of important issues raised that reflects modern society. People might argue that the idea of homosexuality isn’t as taboo in society as it was in the 19th century, but homophobia is still a large and unfortunate part of our world. Just a few weeks ago Kim Davis refused to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples and was supported by thousands of citizens, including presidential candidates like Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, and Bobby Jindal. I wish that homosexuality among other themes of the play could be better assimilated into society sooner than later, but I don’t see that happening anytime soon.
I agree that the plot of the play ran more as different short stories put together into one story rather than a coherent story. And like many other people have stated, the portrayal of taboo subjects in the play has really exposed the negative effects of not having a open mind on taboo subjects. But thankfully modern society has now a more open mind and it is actually encouraged talk about these topics