1Alsatian bilingual writer René Schickele’s origins had a profound and lasting influence on his life and his works. Born in Oberehnheim (Obernai), Alsace under imperial German rule on 4 August 1883 of an Alsatian father and French mother, he grew up speaking French and the Alsatian dialect at home before learning German at school. Throughout his career, he wrote predominantly in the German language and was particularly associated with German Expressionism and the pacifist literary journal Die Weißen Blätter, which he edited during World War I and until 1920 in Switzerland. After the war, Schickele automatically received French citizenship on Alsace’s return to France but moved across the border from Alsace to Badenweiler in the Black Forest, where he continued to publish in German and enjoyed literary success throughout the interwar years. However, with the rise of Nazism, Schickele, as a French citizen whose national loyalties were regarded as ambivalent, decided in 1932 it would be prudent to leave Germany. He moved to the south of France where he lived in self-imposed exile until his death on 31 January 1940, when France and Germany were once again at war and Alsace was under Nazi German control. Schickele’s bilingual and bicultural heritage in a region caught between Franco-German rivalries, and his promotion of Alsace and its people as potential mediators between its neighbours, meant that he was at odds with the dominant nationalist discourses of the time.

Hans im Schnakenloch

5The play’s title is clearly influenced by the name of a popular Alsatian folk song, D’r Hans im Schnockeloch. Hans, according to the original folk song, was an 18th century innkeeper whose premises were located just outside Strasbourg. It was a marshy, mosquito-infested area, inspiring the place-name: Schnakenloch (or in Alsatian dialect, Schnokeloch). Generally, Hans’s inn enjoyed an excellent reputation. However, on one occasion, some of his guests were apparently unhappy with the inn’s service and this is how the satirical folk song originated, with the following chorus:

• 9 Encyclopédies d’Alsace, Strasbourg: 1982-1986, Volume 6, p. 3728-3732. Here p. 3732.

D’r Hàns im Schnockeloch het àlles, wàs mir will.
Un wàs mir will, diss het ’r nit.
Un was ’r het, diss will mir nit.
D’r Hàns im Schnockeloch het àlles, wàs mir will.9

The Alsatian lyricist Adolphe Stöber (1810-1892) composed the version that is best known today, where he transforms Hans the innkeeper into a prosperous but disgruntled farmer. Stöber’s version highlights Hans’s (or the stereotypical Alsatian’s) inherent dissatisfaction with his situation in life. He is restless and never completely happy with who he is or what he has. In titling his play Hans im Schnakenloch, Schickele’s protagonist Hans Boulanger is associated in the spectator’s mind with that of Hans in the folk song, especially since the song is sung in his presence a few times in the play. Furthermore, the title signals to the spectator that Schickele’s play is strongly rooted in Alsace. The specific location of ‘Schnakenloch’, a mosquito-ridden marshland, alludes to a stagnant place engendering a sense of entrapment. It suggests also a sense of persecution, of being plagued by mosquitos on all sides, which can be regarded as symbolising the restlessness of Hans in the play who cannot find peace in his homeland. Alsace is therefore presented as a problematic region, a politically disputed territory suffering on all sides from the bitter rivalry of its neighbours.

8In portraying the microcosmic world of the Boulanger family, Hans im Schnakenloch provides keen insights into the Alsatian psyche on the eve of World War I. It addresses the question of Alsatian loyalties in the context of the relations between France, Germany, and Alsace at that turbulent time in history. For some Alsatian characters in the play, exclusive allegiance to either one or the other powerful, neighbouring nation is depicted as particularly problematic. The Others (France and Germany) through which they define themselves and are an integral part of their identity formation are unwilling to allow them to identify themselves as anything other than wholly French or German. This results in such characters adopting a more ambiguous stance.

Stereotypical polarisations and their deconstruction

10Hans is the elder of the two brothers in the Boulanger family, whose father fought and died for France in the Franco-Prussian War (1870-1871). Both the father’s sacrifice and surname indicate that this family has a strong attachment to France. The family’s name could be an allusion to General Georges Boulanger (1837-1891), a French nationalist and reactionary, who stirred up anti-German sentiment in France following the Franco-Prussian War. However, Hans’s first name highlights both the Germanic component of his cultural heritage and, as aforementioned, his identification with the Hans im Schnakenloch of the folk song, personifying the Alsatian as restive and unsettled. Already in this Franco-German name, therefore, it is suggested that the protagonist Hans Boulanger embodies both a double cultural heritage and ambiguous, restless nature.

11Balthasar, the younger brother, is temperamentally different to Hans, which is a source of underlying tension in their relationship. Hans, being the eldest, is the inheritor of the family estate, Schnakenloch. However, he shirks his duties and prefers to spend long periods travelling abroad, rather than remain in Schnakenloch to take care of the estate. Balthasar seems more steadfast and attached to the family land. He is the dutiful brother who leads a quiet life, running the estate, while the pleasure-seeking Hans, whom Schickele presents as the ‘hero’ of this play, often strays far from home. Therefore, in a manner comparable to the construction of stereotypical polarisations found in Heimatkunst, Hans’s rootlessness is juxtaposed against his younger brother’s rootedness. However, Schickele undermines this constellation of stereotypes, so that Hans’s and Balthasar’s characters cannot be easily categorised into simplistic oppositions such as good and bad, hero and anti-hero. Thus, even if Balthasar acts as the foil to the ‘hero’ Hans, he is portrayed in a more positive light.

12In fact, Balthasar would appear to be more similar in temperament to Klär, his German sister-in-law and Hans’s wife, who also has a deep sense of duty. His alignment with Klär is further underscored when Balthasar tells her in Act I that he has become a lieutenant in the German imperial army. His demonstration of loyalty to Germany in this manner is a deliberate choice. Given the political tensions at that time, Balthasar is aware that such a choice symbolises a rejection of France and his French cultural heritage—a component of his Alsatian identity. Balthasar’s choice could be interpreted as an attempt to resolve an inner identity crisis living in this disputed territory and further highlights the complexity of Alsatian allegiances and cultural identity in this particular context.

13Hans, unlike Balthasar, has no such illusions about attempting to resolve inner conflicts. It is impossible for him to choose in his allegiance to France and Germany, suggesting that, in contrast to Balthasar, he is true, both to himself and his Alsatian heritage. Nevertheless, this apparently positive trait in Hans is not without ambivalence. The inner tensions he experiences living between two cultures hostile towards one another are at the root of his restlessness and inability to commit to one fixed national identity—or indeed, on an allegorical level, to his marriage with his German wife. And yet, a protagonist who leaves his younger brother assuming all the responsibilities of managing the family’s estate and who is also frequently unfaithful to his wife is hardly an admirable ‘hero’. Nonetheless, it is obvious that Hans, despite his unreliability, charms those around him with his flamboyant personality, while Balthasar is frequently overlooked in the shadow of his presence:

Balthasar (zu Klär): “Blick doch einmal, nur eine Sekunde, von Hans auf mich. Die Welt ist doch nicht nur ein Abglanz von ihm.” (Act III, ii, p. 57)

Kultur/Zivilisation polarisations

14These indications of sibling rivalry between the brothers can be interpreted as a representation of the inherent tensions of the Alsatian temperament. It gives rise also to an allegory of Franco-German rivalries and the aforementioned Kultur/Zivilisation polarisations. As Hans is associated with more Gallic traits, he could be aligned with Zivilisation stereotypes, which include unreliability but also a sense of cultural superiority, dominating Balthasar who, with his more Germanic tendencies, is more closely related to Kultur values (dutifulness and a strong work ethic). In light of this allegory, Hans and Balthasar can be considered to mutually define each other. On the one hand, Hans can be carefree and enjoy travelling because he knows he can rely on Balthasar to look after the estate in his frequent absences. On the other hand, it is due to Hans’s irresponsible attitude and incompetent management of the family estate that Balthasar has been forced into the role of the dutiful and reserved brother. Such juxtapositions are reflected in the dialogue between the brothers, which is habitually brusque. Hans is at times dismissive of Balthasar, who is often truculent when conversing with his older brother. This is possibly due to jealousy that Hans can attract so much positive attention. However, Hans acknowledges Balthasar’s capable manner of taking care of the estate. In a remark to Klär, it is evident that despite their fraternal tensions, Hans recognises Balthasar as the true master of Schnakenloch: “Er ist heute schon der Herr im Schnakenloch.” (Act I, vi, p. 14). This acknowledgement suggests a further allegory concerning the fraternal relationship, where Balthasar (Germany) is the real master in Schnakenloch (Alsace) benefitting from Hans’ (France’s/Alsace’s) renunciation of what he (France/Alsace) once possessed.

15The differences between the two brothers are further emphasized in their contrasting reactions to the news of the outbreak of war between France and Germany at the end of the play. The idea of war creates a feeling of anguish for Hans, as he fears he will be forced to choose sides. Due to his particular sense of cultural identity and pacifist outlook, this war is a tragedy, regardless of which side emerges victorious. Hans is a shrewd observer and commentator on the tense political atmosphere leading up to the war, eloquently expressing his opinions on deteriorating Franco-German relations but also on the question of Alsace. Declaring that Germany will never cede its control of Alsace peacefully, he predicts that the next war between France and Germany would be on an unprecedented, catastrophic level. In the scenes comprising dialogue with visiting French politicians to a neighbouring estate in Act II, Hans’s clear and thoughtful reflections on the consequences of war for Alsace and the complex situation it creates for many Alsatians positively transforms our view of him. His description of the Alsatian dilemma of being unable to wholly identify with either of the region’s powerful rival neighbours is both graphic and powerful:

Spannen Sie einen Menschen mit Armen und Beinen zwischen zwei Pferde, jagen Sie die Pferde in entgegengesetzter Richtung davon, und Sie haben genau das erhabene Schauspiel der elsässischen Treue. (Act II, i, p. 30).

This violent image of the self being ripped apart and destroyed conveys the sheer impossibility for him to choose between France and Germany. For Hans, Alsace is the self, whose existence is predicated on a double, dialectical relationship with these two neighbouring countries.

16Unlike Hans, Balthasar is euphoric when he learns of the outbreak of war and appears untroubled by thoughts of the potential consequences of his choice to fight for Germany. Indeed, he seems relieved to have a clear cause to fight for and to demonstrate where his allegiances lie. Balthasar’s reaction to news of the war can be viewed as an attempt to escape the dilemma of being Alsatian in that time of Franco-German hostilities. Although Hans does not share his brother’s euphoria, his probing question, “Bist du einig mit dir?”(Act III, xi, p. 78) suggests that he suspects that Balthasar’s eagerness for war may stem from an attempt to settle an inner conflict. In choosing Germany, Balthasar may also be trying to align himself more closely with his sister-in-law Klär, whom he loves. Although Hans and Balthasar have contrasting reactions with regard to the prospect of war, neither one can evade the complex ambiguities of their Alsatian heritage. Hans feels he faces an impossible choice between Germany and France, symbolised by his violent image of the self being torn apart. By trying to define himself solely in terms of his German cultural heritage, Balthasar makes an attempt to overcome the ambivalence of his identity, but at the cost of denying the importance of his French cultural heritage.

17So far, I have concentrated on the differences in temperament and tensions in the relationship between Hans and Balthasar. However, when a repentant Hans returns to Schnakenloch and to his German wife after ending a three-month affair with his latest mistress, Frenchwoman Louise Cavrel, he vows to resolve his differences with Balthasar and improve their relationship for the sake of family harmony and the estate: “Wir sind Brüder und müssen zusammenhalten.” (Act III, iii, p. 67). After the outbreak of war, when Balthasar, in his German uniform, is hunted by French soldiers on the Schnakenloch estate, Hans demonstrates his love for his brother most clearly by compromising his pacifist ideals and promising to fight in the French army in return for Balthasar’s life. Ironically, Hans’s sacrifice to rescue Balthasar, who on his escape re-joins the German army, means that they are now enemies in this war, symbolising the potential for fratricide. The previously harmless tensions between them are now politicised by this conflict and their fraternal rivalry is distorted and inflated to a tragic level.

Inner conflict on a political level

18Hans’s inner conflict on a political level is reiterated on a personal level also in his relationships with Klär, Hans’s German wife, and Louise, his French mistress. In Schickele’s depictions of these female characters’ national identities, he again plays with Kultur/Zivilisation polarisations, given that the character traits of both Klär and Louise appear to draw on national clichés. In Hans’s relationship with Klär, her role as his wife is clearly aligned with stereotypical Kultur characteristics such as sincerity of feeling, a strong sense of duty and morality, whereas in Hans’s affair with Louise, her behaviour adheres to certain Zivilisation stereotypes, which highlight her sensuality and superficiality. Therefore, like the fraternal relationship, these characters can be read as extended metaphors for the political messages in the play. The personal themes of the play, then, find a corresponding resonance in the political theme.

19Klär and Louise appeal to different aspects of Hans’s nature, with the result that he finds himself unable to choose one in favour of the other. Due to the dichotomous nature of his affections, he hovers, indecisive, unable to make the expected commitment to either of these women who both wish to claim him to the exclusion of the other. This highlights an alternation between literal representations of Louise and Klär with more allegorical representations of them and their relationships with Hans at particular times throughout the play. Hans’s desire to remain married to Klär (“Aber ich habe die Frau und behalte sie.” Act I, vi, p. 16), yet incapacity to stay faithful to her, can be interpreted as Alsace’s ambivalent stance with regard to its union with the Second German Empire. In resisting full assimilation by Germany, Alsace reveals its unwillingness to renege entirely on its nostalgic or emotional attachment to France rather than a desire to rupture its ties with Germany. Observing how Hans’s marital infidelity afflicts Klär, Balthasar vows to defend her against Louise when she insinuates to him that Hans plans to leave his wife for her (“Ich werde Klär verteidigen bis zum letzten.” Act II, V, iii, p. 40). This allegiance to Klär underlines again Balthasar’s more Germanic sympathies, the ideal Alsatian for the ruling Germans. By contrast, Hans’s more Gallic behaviour and attitude, intimating ambivalent loyalties are, from a German stance, cause for suspicion. Yet it is Hans, not Balthasar, whom Klär loves. Klär’s and Hans’s marriage, representing the union of two different but complementing personalities, can be regarded, on an allegorical level, as an aspiration for harmonious relations between Germany and an Alsace that is true to its dual cultural heritage. Likewise, in Hans’s and Balthasar’s attitude to Klär, can be seen the balancing components of the character ‘Hans im Schnakenloch’ in the folk song, in so far as Hans does not (always) desire what he has and Balthasar cannot have what he desires.

21Louise first appears in Act II flirting with Hans at a party in the Countess Sulz’s neighbouring garden. However, our initial impressions of Louise as a femme fatale are undermined later in this act to some extent. Although fully aware of her power to captivate men, she reveals to Hans that she has never been unfaithful to her husband and has little interest in conducting a short-lived affair. Indeed, it becomes apparent that Louise is determined to compel Hans to leave Klär so that he belongs exclusively to her. In undermining the clichéd perception of Louise as femme fatale, Schickele appears to be more intent on using political allegories to discuss Alsace’s relations with France and Germany than in deploying gender-based stereotypes. Thus, Louise’s desire to covet Hans for herself can be interpreted as France’s wish to claim Alsace for itself, forcing it to renege on its attachment to Germany.

22Hans vacillates in his desire for Louise and sense of dutiful love towards Klär, fully aware that he cannot choose both women. During the Countess Sulz’s soirée, Hans realises that it is time to decide to either embark on a love affair with Louise or stay in Schnakenloch with his wife. His indecision is so apparent that his friends mockingly sing “Hans im Schnakenloch.” This reference to the folk song is a reminder that Hans embodies the quintessential Alsatian’s predicament: never fully happy with what they have or certain of what they want.

23Although the relationship between Hans and Louise is in one sense used to represent political and national allegories, their relationship is also convincing on a literal level, even if Schickele plays with the spectator’s expectation of Louise as the play’s femme fatale. Hans, however, appears to expect Louise to conform to this stereotype. She appeals to the more epicurean and hedonistic aspect of his nature (again, an allusion to civilisation stereotypes) but he assumes she understands that theirs will necessarily be a brief affair before he resumes his duties and returns to his wife and Schnakenloch. Louise’s greater expectations from their relationship unsettle Hans since it is impossible for him to give her all she desires: “Liebe, ich komme mir sehr hinterhältig vor. Als ob ich Sie mit falschen Versprechungen überlistet hätte.” (Act II, iii, p. 36). Louise’s hopes and love for Hans turn bitter, souring their relationship. When Hans eventually returns to Klär and the Schnakenloch estate, he feels apprehensive about Louise’s continuing obsession with him. The image of a scorned Louise, combined with political and military undertones of an allegorical relationship between France and Alsace, emphasises the instability of Alsace’s situation (“Ich werde die Frau nicht los... Ich bin eine Festung, die der Feind unter immerwährenden Sturm gesetzt hat, wie unter eine Brandung Waffen.” Act III, iii, p. 65-66). However, although Hans chooses to return to Schnakenloch and save his marriage, this latest infidelity and the outbreak of war alienate Klär from him. She no longer feels she can trust Hans, just as Germany cannot depend upon Alsace’s complete loyalty. Ignorant of Hans’s honourable intentions, in joining the French army to save his brother, she releases all her suppressed feelings of hurt and anger over this latest disloyalty. The war tears their relationship apart and she cannot forgive Hans’s betrayal of her, both as wife and German.

Minor characters as a cross-section of Alsatian society

“Geistiges Elsässertum” and Schickele’s pacifist message

25Hans’s ease of manner in his interactions with the French guests prompts the Countess to exclaim:

Sie können versichert sein, mein junger Freund, wenn ich Sie nicht von Kindsbeinen gekannt hätte, so wie wir Sie unter uns sehen, würde ich Sie gewiß für einen unserer jungen Franzosen halten. (Act II, i, p. 33).

Hans’s fluid communication with both French and Germans can be interpreted as the typical Alsatian’s intrinsic understanding of both cultures, despite not wholly identifying with either nation. Indeed, the main discussion in Act II centres around the controversial subject of Alsace’s relations with both France and Germany. As Countess Sulz muses: “Die ewigen Dinge drehen sich alle um das Elsaß.” (Act II, i, p. 29). This idea of the political and cultural significance of the region of Alsace is at the core of Schickele’s pacifist message. Discussions on Franco-German relations and the escalating threat of war feature heavily in these scenes. Schickele highlights here the disastrous consequences for Alsace if it remains a bone of contention between its warring neighbours, rather than being a means of breaking down the bastions of national-chauvinism. Apart from creating the context for Hans’s and Louise’s encounter before they embark on their affair, this act, where characters of different nationalities discuss their different political viewpoints peacefully, demonstrates a last flicker of optimism that war might yet be avoided before news of its outbreak occurs in Act IV. The polemics and misinterpretations engendered by Act II, were of course inevitable, given when the play was written and performed, and with so much of its dialogue focussed on controversial topics such as Franco-German relations, Alsace and war. This is borne out by the increasingly stringent censorship and eventual banning of Hans im Schnakenloch in Austria-Hungary and Germany.

Admiration for Jean Jaurès and his pacifist brand of socialism

26As Julie Meyer points out, in this second act, two of the characters Cavrel and Simon are based on real French political leaders of that era, namely the French Socialist politician, Jean Jaurès (1859-1914) and the Radical-Socialist minister Aristide Briand (1862-1932). Briand makes an appearance again as Maxime-Simon in Der Wolf in der Hürde, the third novel of Schickele’s trilogy Das Erbe am Rhein:

• 18 Julie Meyer: Vom elsässischen Kunstfrühling zur utopischen Civitas Hominum, p. 224.

Hans Boulanger provoziert im zweiten Aufzug die französischen Parlamentarier Cavrel, in dem Schickele den am Vorabend des Krieges ermordeten Sozialistenführer Jean Jaurès porträtiert und Simon, der nach dem politischen Porträt des Pragmatikers Aristide Briand gezeichnet ist.18

Tensions between Cavrel/Jaurès and Simon/Briand

31The lively debates between Hans, Cavrel, and Simon on contemporaneous political issues and war in this act provided audiences throughout Germany with an exceptional chance to learn of the perspectives of non-revanchiste French political figures, as well as the viewpoint of an Alsatian regarding France and Germany. These discussions also showcase Schickele’s desire for Alsace to be a “Mittelland” whose unique cultural heritage and location should be used to mediate between its hostile neighbours, rather than serve as a source of dispute.

32Hans im Schnakenloch is predominantly a tragic play in which Schickele very effectively transmits a strong pacifist message, drawing on his intuitive understanding of Alsatian identity and keen political awareness concerning Franco-German relations. In his depiction of the Boulanger family and their friends being torn apart, ultra-nationalist bellicosity and the First World War are portrayed as having particularly catastrophic consequences for Alsace, foreshadowing the same Alsatian dilemma, which finds expression again in his writings in the inter-war era.

Das Erbe am Rhein

• 32 Diary entry, 6/7 May 1934, Ibid., p. 1104.

Noch immer kommt jedem ehrlichen Elsässer sein Dasein fragwürdig vor. Die Zeit, für die mein Schauspiel ein Dokument sein soll, ist noch lange nicht begraben. Das Vorzeichen allein ist geändert.32

A supra-national message

• 38 René Schickele to Adolf von Hatzfeld. Letter dated 3 January 1932. In: Werke III, p. 1161-1162. H (...)

Der Aufbau der Trilogie? Maria Capponi: Liebe, du und ich, “und sonst gar nichts”. Blick auf die Vogesen: Vom Individualismus zur Gemeinschaft, Heimat, Familie. Der Wolf in der Hürde: Auflösung der bisherigen Gemeinschaft durch soziale Umstände, hauptsächlich aber durch die Angst – die Tragödie der Angst.38

• 40 Stefan Woltersdorff: Chronik einer Traumlandschaft. Elsassmodelle in Prosatexten von René Schicke (...)

Zwar wird der Ich-Erzähler des ersten Teils nun durch einen Er-Erzähler abgelöst, doch der “Nullpunkt” aus dem erzählt wird […] ist auch weiterhin teilweise identisch mit Claus Breuschheim.40

37The trilogy’s narrative begins with a letter written by Claus to the eponymous Maria Capponi in the spring of 1922. The act of writing triggers Claus’s memories, and he feels he must continue with his story until some kind of conclusion is reached:

Ich versuche, mich aus den Trümmern einer Welt herauszuarbeiten, mit nichts als einer kleinen Feder. Die Arbeit begann, als ich mich zu meiner eigenen Überraschung hinsetzte, um an Maria zu schreiben, und jetzt muß ich fortfahren – bis zu irgendeinem Ende (MC, p. 66).

This personal narrative, comprising the first volume and spanning a century of the von Breuschheim family history from the Napoleonic period to Alsace in the inter-war era, is set both in Alsace and beyond its borders in different European countries. It focuses in particular on Claus’s memories from adolescence to young adulthood.

39In Das Erbe am Rhein, as in Hans im Schnakenloch, we witness how even within the family circle in this much-disputed region it is difficult to avoid politics. It is clear that here again, Schickele draws on disparities in the diverse personalities and allegiances of members of the von Breuschheim family to symbolise the double cultural heritage of Alsatian identity. This is most evident in the tense relationship between Claus and his older adopted brother Ernst, an echo of Hans’s and Balthasar’s fraternal relations in the play, again due to their differing temperaments and political outlook concerning Alsace, France, and Germany.

Cosmopolitan perspectives

40Unlike the play, however, which restricts itself to the triangular constellation of Alsace, France, and Germany as its framework, Das Erbe am Rhein balances its focus on the Alsatian context with more cosmopolitan perspectives and seeks to undermine narrow nationalist and provincial aims. Claus appears to feel equally at home abroad as he is in Alsace. His broader experiences of diverse cultures aid him in more clearly understanding his own identity as well as critically discerning both the negative and positive qualities of his homeland. Furthermore, Schickele situates Alsace in a wider European context, which is no longer simply predicated on relations both east and west of its borders but also north and south. Much of the narrative of the first volume of the trilogy, for example, is set in Mediterranean lands such as Italy and the south of France. Therefore, the descriptions of different landscapes in the trilogy help promote Alsace as a “Mittelland”, at the heart of Europe, and Schickele’s idea of “geistiges Elsässertum.” Claus’s son, Jacquot’s comment on Alsace being a central rather than a peripheral region supports this argument: “[D]as Elsaß ist der Mittelpunkt der Erde. Darum dreht sich alles andere” (BV, p. 64). It is reminiscent also of the aforementioned comment on the centrality and significance of Alsace made by Countess Sulz in Hans im Schnakenloch.

41By the end of Das Erbe am Rhein, Claus fully understands that it is now up to him alone to preserve and pass on the von Breuschheim legacy. ‘Vor mir geht keiner mehr’ (WH, p. 551). This legacy includes not just the family’s regional roots and Alsatian cultural heritage but also its European cosmopolitanism. In passing on this legacy to the next generation there would seem to be hope for the future of Europe. However, the trilogy does not conclude on an optimistic note. Jacquot, Claus’s only son and thus the inheritor of the von Breuschheim estate, has moved abroad to escape the tense, political atmosphere of Alsace in the inter-war years. Likewise, Schickele’s device of starting and ending the trilogy with the same sentence, is, as he suggests himself, symbolic of his generation’s fate to repeat in cyclical fashion the same political errors:

• 43 Letter from René Schickele to Adolf von Hatzfeld, 3 January 1932, Werke III, p. 1161-1162. Here, (...)

Und was unsere Generation anlangt, so ist sie verurteilt, im Kreise zu gehn... Deshalb hat der Wolf in der Hürde, hat die Trilogie auch kein “Ende”, sondern der Wolf schließt wörtlich mit dem Satz, mit dem Maria Capponi begann.43

However, this resignation in terms of Alsace’s mediator role is tempered by the fact that Alsace as a region remains connected to a wider Europe:

• 44 Anne Kwaschik: “An der Grenze der Nationen: Europa-Konzepte und regionale Selbstverwertung im Els (...)

Schickele erteilte der geistigen Vermittlerrolle des Elsass am Ende seiner elsässischen Roman-Trilogie eine resignierte Absage, aber die Verbindung von Elsass und Europa tastete er nicht an.44

Schickele regarded fear as the biggest barrier to breaking free from the destructive cycles of narrow provincialism, bellicose nationalism, and conflict. Using Claus as a mouthpiece, Schickele challenges his readers at the end of the trilogy not to give up the dream of creating a new order in Europe: “uns fehlt ja nur eins: Mut!” (WH, p. 553).

Conclusion

42In Hans im Schnakenloch and Das Erbe am Rhein, both time and place shape the Boulanger and von Breuschheim family destinies. We see how the problematic nature of their double cultural heritage in particular political contexts complicates relationships in both families. In the play, for example, in the lead-up to World War I, the impact of Franco-German hostilities splits the family apart, when Alsace was part of the Second German Empire. Hans and Balthasar, representatives of their generation in this much-disputed region, are swept up in the war between France and Germany and forced to choose sides. In the trilogy of novels, where the focus switches to another landed family, the von Breuschheims, and the context of the inter-war era, similar mistakes are repeated with expectations of unequivocal allegiance, this time to France. Here again, as in the play, Schickele’s view of Alsace as mediator and bearer of not only a French but also German tradition is not a political argument but a cultural one. The trilogy thus reinforces the play’s arguments in favour of Schickele’s mission of “geistiges Elsässertum.”

43As Joachim Storck points out, Schickele himself epitomises the image of the Alsatian as ideal mediator, having grown up in a bilingual environment, inheritor of a double cultural heritage, and promoter of a peaceful Europe:

• 45 Joachim Storck: “Ein alemannischer Rebell. Zum hundersten Geburtstag von René Schickele am 4.8.19 (...)

Als “Sohn Frankreichs” wird der Elsässer ausdrücklich bezeichnet, der zugleich aber, als ein Dichter deutscher Zunge, zum Mittler zwischen beiden Kulturen und Nationen legitimiert wird.45

In his works, Schickele’s in-depth knowledge of both Germany and France, as well as his unflagging interest in the contemporaneous events unfolding in his native Alsace, is much in evidence. Although his disillusion about the future of European harmony, discernible at the end of Das Erbe am Rhein was soon to be validated by political developments in Germany and by the outbreak of World War II, his hope for a more harmonious, open European space was to be fulfilled some decades after his death. Alsace’s capital Strasbourg also enjoys a symbolic role as a city of international significance where both the Council of Europe and European Parliament are located. France and Germany are at the heart of this union, which Schickele regarded as a necessity for lasting peace in Europe.