Week Five: Reading, Viewing, and Discussion Questions: Kaspar Hauser

For the first lecture, I have asked you to read two texts. Please read each text in its entirety before the lecture. You will get two different versions of the Kaspar Hauser story from these readings and you may want to mark down certain differences. For example, Bondeson portrays a very loquacious Kaspar—as if he spoke fluently from the beginning—whereas Feuerbach’s account (and most others) emphasize his lack of speech. Please read them in the following order:

I. Jan Bondeson, "The Mystery of Kaspar Hauser," which is in your reader, pp.55-72. This is an excerpt from Bondeson's 2004 book, The Great Pretenders and, as you may guess from the title, Bondeson thinks Kaspar Hauser was a fraud. If you are interested in reading Bondeson's theory of who KH might have been and how he managed to masquerade as a 16-year-old foundling, check out the book (pp.102-26). Your reader has only the historical material from Bondeson's KH chapter. We have copies of the other pages on reserve.

1. What kind of prose is this (scholarly, popular, mixture)? Who is the audience? How does this entry differ from other historical essays you have read?

2. How does Feuerbach enter Bondeson's account (57) and what is the significance of Kaspar's choice between the coins?

3. How does Bondeson characterize Daumer? What is the first thing we learn about him? What else does Bondeson say about Daumer as a person and how does this affect his credibility?

4. How might Kaspar be "a living refutation of the doctrine of original sin" (59)?

5. Kaspar joins a number of families. Whom does he live with in the course of his public life?

6. How does Bondeson explain Kaspar's death?

7. Read "The Legend of Prince Kaspar" very carefully. What do Prince theorists believe happened in Baden?

II. Anselm Ritter von Feurebach, Kaspar Hauser: Account of a Crime Against the Soul , which is in the paperback The Wild Child (called The Lost Prince) in hardback. Feuerbach was an important German jurist and legal scholar (he wrote the Bavarian Penal Code in 1813), who personally observed and interacted with KH from 1828-33. Feuerbach was highly sympathetic to KH, who lived in his house for a short time, and he privately believed that KH was the lost prince of Baden (see Bondeson, 66-69). He also admired and trusted Lord Stanhope (see Feuerbach's dedication). The editor of your book, Jeffrey Masson, also believes that KH was the Prince of Baden, and furthermore that Feuerbach was murdered and that Lord Stanhope was behind KH's murder and probably also Feuerbach's. You have a right to be skeptical about Masson's conclusions in the introduction and in the notes.

1. What does Feuerbach say about Kaspar's language? (76; 86)

2. Follow the references to religion very closely throughout the text. How does KH react to religion and religious teachings early on? How does he regard religion by the end? Feuerbach is the father of the philosopher Ludwig Feuerbach, whose philosophy of atheism and materialism was highly influential in Germany in the mid-nineteenth century. KH may have been a better son in this regard (though Ludwig had yet to publish The Essence of Christianity). Watch for 132-33 where Daumer convinces Kaspar that there is a God. How does he do it?

3. What, according to Feuerbach were the crimes committed against Kaspar? (100-101).

4. Kaspar was a writer (like you) and there are examples of his writing in Appendix 3 (187-96). How does writing figure in his story? Where does it come up?

Discussion Questions:

1.What is your major or your major academic interest? What kinds of questions would a representative of your field bring to the phenomenon of Kaspar Hauser? Be detailed in your response.

2. Given that you at this point have read only two of the thousands of publications (books, articles, novels, plays, poems, libretti) on KH, you don't have all of the information, but you do have quite a bit. What do you think really happened and why?

3. Family and State. These two terms may coincide for Kaspar, especially if we believe the Prince theory. In what ways does the state function as Kaspar's family? What other kinds of families does he encounter?

Viewing Questions for Lecture Two :

Werner Herzog: The Enigma of Kaspar Hauser

The film you will view before the second lecture is a fictionalization of the Kaspar Hauser story. In some ways, it follows history closely and in some ways it deviates creatively. Herzog claims to be seeking "ecstatic truth" in his films rather than factual representation, but you will nonetheless recognize many incidents and events from the Feuerbach and Bondeson accounts. To learn more about the director, go to his website, http://www.wernerherzog.com/main/.

One thing you will notice immediately is that Herzog lets the camera dwell on certain shots much longer than is necessary to convey the information that drives the narrative. He wants you to really look at these scenes/objects/landscapes and to reflect on them. So viewing this film will be an exercise in sustained looking. Don't get impatient.

1. Herzog referred to the opening material as "enigmatic shots that do not belong to the story at all." How do these images set the stage for the story? Why do this? Note well that reading Chapter 6 of the Writer’s Handbook (58-62) will be very helpful to you this week.

2. Bruno S., a street musician and forklift driver who was severely traumatized in early childhood, was 41 years old at the time he played 16-year-old Kaspar. Do you find that he fits the role? Is this how you imagined Kaspar?

3. Writing: Watch for writing scenes. Much is made of writing when KH appears in Nuremberg: he writes his name; the magistrate writes out a detailed and exacting report. What do you make of all this writing?

4. Table manners and language. KH begins to learn civilized discourse at the jailer's table. What is his problem with the cup and the word "empty" (leer)?

5. Look for scenes in which Kaspar argues for the validity of his perceptions vs. that which is being taught to him. Name one and describe it.

6. The circus scene was invented by the filmmakers. KH did not appear in a circus. What does this scene contribute to your impression of KH's tale? Why is it in there?

7. How does the film end and what are your impressions of the ending?