1 Éric Eugène: Wagner and Gobineau

Éric Eugène:
Wagner and Gobineau
When on 19 April 1871 Arthur Gobineau, 1 through the intervention of the historian Auguste
Mignet, was presented to Adolphe Thiers, the head of the transition government, he could not
suspect that he was going to seal the fate of his literary work. His business was to apply for a
diplomatic post to the man who would crush a month later the Commune of Paris and he was not
yet sure to obtain the post. Gobineau had been ambassador three times (in Persia, Greece and
Brazil) under the Sécond Empire, a regime that Thiers had never stopped fighting. But the latter did
not seem to hold it against him and promised him an embassy. "Let me finish all this business about
Paris and I shall fix up your affairs", 2 he had assured him. This promise took, however, a little time
to come true and the wait seemed very long to Gobineau. Finally, by decree of 14 May 1872 signed
by Thiers and by Charles de Rémusat, the Foreign Secretary, Gobineau was named Ambassador of
France to Sweden and Norway and arrived in Stockholm on 7 June 1872. This was going to be
Gobineau's last embassy determining the course of the last years of the diplomat. There he made the
acquaintance of two persons who were going to play a decisive role for the career of his work, the
first directly and the second by chance: the Countess Mathilde-Marie de La Tour, the wife of the
Italian ambassador, with whom he was going to have a rather unusual affair, 3 and Philipp von
Eulenburg, a young Prussian diplomat attached to the German embassy, 4 with whom he would
develop a deep friendship. It was Eulenburg who presented Gobineau to the aristocratic circles of
the German capital in which he was well introduced. In particular on June 26, 1875 he was
presented to the Countess Marie von Schleinitz, the wife of the Prussian Minister of the house of the
Emperor and a great friend of Wagner. Gobineau was a very brilliant conversationalist who
mastered German perfectly and excelled at the manipulation of paradoxes. He made a great
impression. Countess von Schleinitz was completely won over and considered it useful and urgent
to organise a meeting between her protégé and the French diplomat.
I - Richard Wagner (1813-1883) and Arthur Gobineau (1816-1882) were nearly contemporaries,
but their artistic situation was not comparable. Wagner was one of the most famous men of his time
and, naturally, knew nothing of the existence and the work of Gobineau. The latter, on the other
hand, was totally unknown, not only by the general public, but also by the cultivated circles, with
the exception of a few specialists. There was thus no equality of status among the two protagonists
so much so that before going to see Wagner for the first time Gobineau was quite dazzled "I am
going to see today or tomorrow somebody, do you imagine? The great Richard Wagner himself!"
he announced triumphantly to his Greek friend, Marie Dragoumis. 5 Wagner had nothing to expect
from Gobineau, only one more courtier or intruder. For Gobineau, on the other hand, this should be
a means to revalue him in his own eyes and to take revenge on those who had ignored him until
now.
Gobineau's life was a continuation of often happy accidents and laborious conquests to free
himself of an inferior situation. He had needed a lot of ambition in his young years to get ahead in
life since he was without means, without relations and punished by a family only rich in hostile
rumours (rather justified). His chance was that Alexis de Tocqueville 6 noticed him, made him the
Version 19/02/02
GE5
1
head of cabinet in the Foreign Ministry and launched him in the diplomatic service (where he would
be, as already noted, Ambassador of France on four occasions). Simultaneously to his
administrative career, Gobineau was a prolific and eclectic writer, although not always successful.
He wrote a novel Les Pleiades 7 ), a collection of novellas, Nouvelles asiatiques, 8 by far his best
work, the scenes from La Renaissance, 9 several books on his experiences in Persia: Trois ans en
Asie (Three years in Asia), Les réligions et philosophies en Asie centrale (Religions and
Philosophies in Central Asia). Finally, there is the "racist" block that constitutes the Essai sur
inégalité des races humaines (Essay on the inequality of the human races), 10 Ottar Jarl, 11 Amadis,
12
an epic poem, and, to a lesser degree, the History of the Persians.
These last books had Gobineau’s favour and he spoke mostly about them. In the first letter
that he wrote to Cosima Wagner he insisted at length on the genesis of these works by clarifying:
"Please, agree that I am persistent and know how to make an idea mature." 1313 On this point one
must agree with Gobineau and the Essay on the inequality of the human races, a considerable
volume, can be considered the founding work of modern racism, notably for its scientific claims.
The basic idea, however, was rather simplistic and based on the postulate that races are unequal and
that the Aryan race (or the Germanic, according to Gobineau's terminology), that came from Central
Asia, was the superior one. This assertion was not very original because, on the topic of inequality
of races nearly all of the thinkers of the time were of similar opinion, even the most progressive
ones. For example, a scholar as progressive as Thomas Huxley, while favouring the emancipation
of the Blacks, was indeed convinced of their innate inferiority. But where Gobineau went much
further than most of his contemporaries, was that not only did he not believe in the unity of
“humanity“, but even questioned its existence. Towards the end of his life, freed from any caution
towards the Church or political power, Gobineau even stressed this subject of the non-brotherhood
among mankind. To the "base" humanity, not only did he "not recognise a soul", 1414 those that
composed it, he pursued, were "anthropoids, never Men." 15 While the Essay was still too much
marked by the necessities of a rising career to be protected, his writings at the end of his life and
(notably Amadis) translated the real thought of Gobineau who did not hesitate to denounce the
"dangerous master" (that is Jesus Christ) who:
"Celebrated the cripples, embraced the lepers,
And gave the vote to this sickly clan, as well as
Their license for title and for an inherited title
To have held out the hand to some charity."
While
"All these paupers, these sons of fate, all these people, all this has no soul." 16
The most original or "innovative" aspect of Gobineau’s racism was based on its essential
pessimism. Indeed, Gobineau asserted that races were not only unequal, but also inevitably forced
to mix. He judged the consequences of these mixtures as "horrifying", because, he specified, the
qualities of so-called superior races "were lowered and it is an evil that nothing can make up for or
repair." 17 Gobineau thought that this crossing between races lead to the decline of humanity and
that nothing (and especially not eugenics!) could stop this decay. What the diplomat augured was
the death of the "superior" man, that of the white race and Gobineau concluded with a formula that
so much struck Wagner and some of his followers, like Heinrich von Stein: "Nations, no, human
crowds, swamped in their sad solitude, will live from then on numbed in their nullity, as ruminating
buffaloes in the stagnant puddles of the Pontinic swamps." 18 The system wanted to be explanatory
Version 19/02/02
GE5
2
of the sense of history and placed itself under the authority of science. To Tocqueville, who blamed
him for professing materialistic doctrines, he retorted: "It is a search, an exhibition, an extraction of
the facts", adding "I do not say to people, ’You are excusable or reprehensible’, I say to them ‘You
will die!’ " 19 It was thus an original system that Gobineau set up. It distinguished itself totally on
this point from later racism, notably that of Houston Stewart Chamberlain who envisaged to create a
superior man by a good selection policy. The latter, moreover, was correct in stating to Cosima
Wagner: "Some people think that a ‘pure race’ could have fallen one day from the sky and would
degenerate gradually and without possible hope as a result of crossing, [...] while nature teaches us
that the so-called ‘pure races’ can only be produced by breeding." 20
Finally, Gobineau did not at all believe that the Germans were the descendants of a
superior race (here too contrary to Chamberlain). For Gobineau "the Germans [were] not of
Germanic essence", 21 the ethnic variety of Germany was unlimited, the language was crossed and
the population consisted essentially of a mixture of Celts and Slavs. 22 According to him, it was in
England that the Germanic influence was the most alive from a racial point of view. 23 It is
completely wrong to see in Gobineau's work an apology of Germany and in the author of Amadis a
bard of Pangermanism by anticipation. It is not the smallest of paradoxes of history that Gobineau,
particularly in France, was accused of crimes, that he had not committed, but was absolved of those
for which he should have been condemned. The man who believed that there was not a race more
mixed than the Germans passed to posterity (in France) as an agent of the hereditary enemy and
apostle of the "Herrenvolk".
II - This was the man, who returned from a journey through Russia, Turkey and Greece where he
had accompanied the emperor of Brazil Dom Pedro II, whom Wagner met, on the initiative of Lady
von Schleinitz at the end of November 1876. One does not know the exact date of the encounter,
nor what they said at this occasion. Cosima noted only Gobineau's "pleasant" character without
insisting about it. 24 Gobineau himself remained silent in his correspondence and did not even
mention this meeting to his sister whom he usually told everything. But there is no need for
documents to conclude on the purely social character of the event, because it took four years for a
second meeting to take place, in the house of Princess Hatzfeld in Venice on 22 October 1880.
Gobineau, this time, had prepared himself. He was brilliant, according to his friend Madame de la
Tour, 25 and captivated Wagner by the extent of his culture and the ingenuity of his paradoxes. He
strongly attacked Cervantes (whom Wagner liked very much) to have scoffed at what was according to him - the most sacred, chivalry. Seduced, even fascinated, Wagner, who was not used
to meeting such an unusual and original personality any more, wanted to pursue these exchanges. A
relationship started and Wagner began reading Gobineau's works at least those that he was able to
find. Cosima did as much by engaging in an intense correspondence with the diplomat. 13
Wagner began by reading La Renaissance with great interest (in November 1880). Amadis
was done within two days and seemed to him execrable (in December 1880); he read at least twice
the Nouvelles asiatiques with joy (in January - February 1881), but had little interest in Les
Pleiades. He finally read in February and March 1881, after many delays to get hold of the
volumes, the enormous set that constitutes the Essay on the inequality of the human races. Cosima
also showed herself very diligent by adding Ottar Jarl to her reading list. When Gobineau came to
Bayreuth in May of the same year (doubtlessly invited at the meeting in Venice), he met a Wagner
Version 19/02/02
GE5
3
who for six months had practically read only his works.
Gobineau arrived in Bayreuth on 2 May 1881. But Richard and Cosima were not in their
‘capital’, being retained in Berlin for the performances of the Ring staged by Angelo Neumann.
Until 11 May Gobineau lived in Wahnfried in the midst of the children and of Paul von Joukowski.
As soon as Wagner arrived, the stay became very pleasant for Gobineau, as one could expect,
because he was shown consideration to which he was not accustomed anymore and this from one of
the most prestigious artistic circles of Europe. Each of the protagonists behaved in a courteous and
respectful way towards the other, and Gobineau was even invited to accompany Wagner for the
second cycle of the Ring in Berlin from 25 till 29 May. This, nevertheless, did not prevent several
painful scenes, like that of 18 May that Cosima recorded: "In the evening, a debate arose between
R[ichard] and the Count about the Irish whom Gobineau considered incapable to work. R. became
very violent, he said that he would not work under such conditions either and castigated the English
aristocrats. The count went so far in his argument that he blamed the Gospel for intervening in
favour of the poor. All this ended, however, in a very friendly way. R. confessed that he did not
know the question in detail and the count said to him: ‘Vous voyez les choses en philosophe et moi
en homme d’affaire’ . " 26 This altercation is all the more interesting as it brought together all the
ingredients of the later debate. Gobineau reacted according to his racist thesis. The Irish were wrong
in his eyes only because they were Celts. The English owners were in their right because they
descended from the Norman conquerors, thus were Germanic. The fact that the English owners
exploited the Irish was of no importance to him because they belonged to the superior race. Wagner,
for his part, behaved according to his transcendent sense of justice and temperament that always
sided with the victims and the oppressed. Gobineau had no time for justice. It was of value only to
protect the strong and powerful. Thus the final arrangement made no sense, but it still took place,
because there was on both sides not enough energy left or too much worldly behaviour, to let the
apparent harmony be durably perturbed, an attitude that both men adopted, in fact, throughout their
relation. In her Journal, Cosima evoked, much more briefly, a second painful scene that took place
on 3 June. The previous evening, Gobineau had spoken a lot and Wagner had spent a very bad
night. He did not feel well and at the table, in front of Gobineau "he literally exploded in favour of
Christianity as opposed to the racial theories." 27 Cosima did not go on about the incident, but the
sentence expresses enough about the climate of tension that reigned then in Wahnfried.
Some days before Gobineau's departure, Wagner offered his complete works with this
inscription: "Normann und Sachse, das ist der rechte Bund, was noch frisch und gesund, dass das
blühe und wachse." 28 André Cœuroy and Jean Gaulmier spoke on the subject of the dedication as
of the most pleasant and deferential kind, without noticing that “blüh’ und wachs'“ is the slogan of
Sixtus Beckmesser - who can hardly qualify as a "positive" hero in Wagner's work. It is not
impossible that Wagner, while maintaining the appearances towards Gobineau, wanted in fact to
keep an amused distance. It seems, however, that Gobineau, who knew Die Meistersinger, 29 was
not fooled. In a letter that he sent on 8 June to Wagner, i.e. the day after his departure, he answered
on the same tone: "You shall have to tell me what it would cost to send all Germanics in closed
ranks to Bayreuth. If you do not tell me all these things, what can I do? Who will tell me? All this
has no common sense." 30 He continued in this vein in his letter of 15 June: "Tell the Master", he
asked Cosima, "how much I am attached to him with heart and soul and that he is the first Christian
Version 19/02/02
GE5
4
of the Ist or the IInd century that I find close to myself. In brief, one stays what one is and I am
more German than he agrees to be [...] I have no more virtue to concede any more than that [...]." 31
Gobineau, however, did not content himself with these points, he also wanted to reject
Wagner’s rebuttals. In this sense it is necessary to read, in our opinion, the very dense letter that he
sent to Cosima on 29 July 1881. In June Cosima had asked her half sister, the Countess Claire de
Charnacé, to find a publisher for a second edition of the Essay. But the latter had made some ironic
remarks on Gobineau's thesis that came back to him. Taking advantage of an indirect answer to
Madame de Charnacé, Gobineau used the opportunity to detail all the points on which he diverged
with Wagner (inanity of the faith in the regeneration of the world, superiority of the Germanic race,
biologic racism...) and insisted on the fact that Madame de Charnacé (and consequently Wagner
himself) should take him as he was: "If one does not share my beliefs, I am absolutely in error and I
am not interesting." 32 Gobineau could have reacted by writing directly to Wagner, but he would
then have risked a debate that could have entailed a break among the two men, that was the
intention of neither. The intervention of Madame de Charnacé gave him the ideal occasion to state
what he had on his mind and his ideological determination by choosing the ‘false’ correspondent.
Among people of good education, this would suffice. While Cosima in her letters detailed the points
of discord by feigning convergence, 33 Gobineau did not want to be fooled like Cosima, but instead
insisted to send to third parties his strong statements. There was no ambiguity between the two men,
but also no argument.
III - After Gobineau's departure from Bayreuth, Wagner took up the reading of the Essay on the
inequality of the human races again that he had begun in March. He finished it in the middle of
August. This says much about the attention he devoted to it. Immediately, he went on to write a
substantial article entitled Heldentum und Christentum (Heroism and Christianity). This text had
actually matured in him over a period of six months, even before reading the Essay, as soon as he
got acquainted, accidentally, with a book dating from 1856 of August-Friedrich Pott, professor at
the University of Halle, that presented in a critical, but objective way the main conclusions of
Gobineau's tome. 34 That is why, as soon as he had the opportunity (namely when Gobineau, at
Cosima's invitation, supplied an article for the Bayreuther Blätter entitled Ein Urteil über die jetzige
Weltlage [A judgement upon the actual situation of the world]), Wagner tried to distance himself
from Gobineau's pessimism. 35 But his main concern was to answer - really profoundly - a
document that had impressed him to the degree that he even had interrupted the composition of
Parsifal to read it. 36 Heldentum und Christentum is thus an essential document in the context of his
maturation and elaboration of his positions towards Gobineau ‘s thoughts.
Begun in mid-August, the article was finished on 17 September 1881. Wagner was very
pleased with it. It seemed to him that he had succeeded to write what he had to say, without being
brought to the point of breaking with Gobineau. No useless debate should oppose him with a man
quick to pick a fight. How had he done this? After having summarised the main theses of Gobineau
(regrettably a bit too friendly towards Gobineau, that would only increase the risk of faulty
interpretations), Wagner presented then the reasons that brought him to oppose the Frenchman in
strong wording. He underlined first of all that "a glance cast on all races must not make us
underestimate the unity of the human race, one could even say its qualities, in the most noble sense,
which are summarised in the faculty to suffer consciously." 37 He continued by evoking the figure
of Christ who died for all Men and not for a particular race by clarifying: "The blood of the Saviour
Version 19/02/02
GE5
5
which run from his head and his wounds on the cross, what sacrilege would it be to ask, whether it
belongs to the white race or to any other race?" 38 He finished with words that could with difficulty
agree with Gobineau's pessimism: "If we nevertheless wanted to try to find some hope for the future
of the human race in spite of all the dismays of which we spoke, all we have to do is bring our
attention to the possibility that [...] it would be possible that a general equality of races - that at
present are all similar as a result of the mixtures - did not lead us at once, it is true, to an ethical
order; but that this equality shall be the foundation for an universal moral agreement, such as we
think that real Christianity is called to realise." 39
Wagner wanted to be clear towards Gobineau for whom this text seemed solely intended.
Regrettably, the article was written in such a swollen language and according to such a very
complex intellectual progression that it seemed very confused even to commentators as informed as
Glasenapp or Schemann. 40 What had he wanted to say? In fact Wagner had asked the following
question: is there a superior race? Gobineau believes this, he said, and designates in this role the
Aryan race. But for Wagner this race of heroes is moved by the selfish “will to live“, i.e. the illusion
that makes man always dissatisfied with his existence, that urges him to alienate his freedom and to
dominate his fellow men. There is thus - for Wagner - no real superior race, but there are, on the
other hand, superior beings, the saints, of which Christ is the most noble figure. These beings are
animated by compassion towards their brothers and a sense of the universal suffering that makes
them aware of the unity of the human race. It is thanks to the surpassing of oneself that overcomes
egoism that humanity can be regenerated by finding its unity. 41 Thus clarified, Wagner's thougts
could not be associated to Gobinism in any way. But here also the contradiction appears that should
render Wagner’s thoughts more difficult to understand. If Wagner expressed in this article his
hostility towards racism, one must not forget his militant anti-Judaism that he manifested already
very early. Gobineau, however, did not commit this fault and had celebrated the Jewish people in
elogious terms: ”[...] a clever people in everything its undertakes, a free people, a strong people, an
intelligent people [...].“ 42 One sees the double paradox, that Gobineau was a racist, but not an antiSemite, while Wagner was exactly the contrary. But this contradiction escaped many of the later
commentators. The significance of Heroism and Christianity - already not quite evident without
prior knowledge of Gobineau's theses - was further obscured.
Once the article finished, he sent it to Gobineau. A letter of Madame de la Tour expressed
"the joy that Gobineau had felt upon the reception of the sending." 43 One could suspect that the
reality was quite different. One can appreciate this when reading the very curious letter that
Gobineau sent to Wagner on 25 September 1881. Gobineau behaved, indeed, as if he had received
nothing and did not raise any of the subjects evoked by Heldentum und Christentum. On the other
hand in the postscript of his letter he declared himself "very impressed by what the doctor
Schemann 44 [had said to Wagner] about the Races (i.e. the Essay). It is no less true", he added,
"that when I wrote it then, I did make a mistake. I believed that it would last about thirty years more
and this is what I said in the conclusion [of the Essay]. I would no longer say this today." 45 In other
words, Gobineau outbid his own thesis that he considered still too optimistic. This could not favour
a rapprochement with Wagner. Thus no conflict, but each one stayed on his positions so much so
that from this date on, neither Wagner nor Gobineau hinted at their divergent views. From this point
of view their intellectual exchange ended on a statement of total (but discreet) discord.
IV - Wagner pursued his reading of Gobineau's works. He read attentively Three years in Asia,
finished The Religions and Philosophies in Central Asia, and was considerably interested in the
Version 19/02/02
GE5
6
History of the Persians (but after Gobineau's death). Ottar Jarl, on the other hand, had aroused in
him only moderate interest. At the same time the correspondence between Cosima and Gobineau
started again, especially interesting since he revealed his fears, the lack of credible projects and his
isolation. Cosima was interested specially in the problem of re-publication of Gobineau's works,
doubtless to prove her friendly support. Wagner on the other hand was obsessed by the idea that the
Frenchman should join their small world, proof, if necessary, of the extreme state of intellectual
isolation in which the composer was at the end of his life. He made even the effort to write
personally to the diplomat (on 10 February 1882) to order him to join them. 46 Wagner took very
badly Gobineau's hesitations. The latter wanted to keep his strength to attend the première of
Parsifal, planned to take place in July 1882. Or had he become incapable to settle somewhere?
It is thus in a state of extreme weakness that Gobineau appeared at the villa Wahnfried on 11
May 1882, one year after his first visit. He seemed to regain his strength gradually, without
becoming totally integrated in the domestic life of Wagner. For the anniversary of the Master on 22
May a festivity was given in Wahnfried, simple, good-humoured. Wagner was very happy, laughed
to tears and did not stop asking to repeat the description of a peasant fight. While Wagner was
engaged in this noisy enjoyment, Gobineau, who had remained utterly strange to this feast, had
withdrawn into a corner of the house and mumbled repeatedly: "It is hideous, how childish!” The
pseudo-aristocrat could not accept the simple, plebeian enjoyments, in which the former
revolutionary took pleasure. 47 As for the discussions, they were as intense as during the first stay.
What had changed, however, was the nature of the conversations. Both men knew each other better
and did not want to provoke each other. They chose less consequent subjects of conversation, but
about the races there was absolutely no question. Gobineau's health began to deteriorate again,
however, and following a very violent thunderstorm, he was so bad that Cosima became afraid and
consulted the family doctor, Karl Landgraf, who advised at once a cure in Bad Gastein in Austria.
Gobineau left Bayreuth on 17 June. He would never see Wagner again.
In Bad Gastein, Gobineau was in extreme distress, and not knowing what to do, sent letters
upon letters to Wagner (seven letters from 22 June to 10 July, among it one to Eva Wagner) without
obtaining an answer, because in Bayreuth the preparations for Parsifal occupied everybody’s mind.
Gobineau returned to Chaméane, the castle of Madame de la Tour in the Auvergne. He stayed there
for a little while, but not being able to stay put there and profoundly bored, left for Italy. He arrived
in Turin in a state of complete physical decay and died there on 13 October 1882. Richard and
Cosima Wagner learnt of his death twelve days later while they were in Venice. They were very
affected, especially Richard: "You have hardly met somebody, that he runs between your fingers"
he confided to Cosima who noted in her Journal: "We do not stop throughout the day remembering
this incomparable man until the evening when R[ichard] plays the first measures of Siegfried's
funeral march." 48 The next day Wagner asked his wife to get to work to write an article for the
Bayreuther Blätter in memory of Gobineau. Wagner watched it closely, correcting or completing
Cosima frequently. 49 He did not leave it at that and during the some months that he had left to live,
he did not stop evoking the memory of Gobineau.
But these sorry comments masked the real nature of Wagner's feeling towards Gobineau. At
the beginning of their relation, Wagner was fascinated by the personality of Gobineau. The reading
of the Nouvelles asiatiques really dazzled the German. "My God", he exclaimed, "to say that I got
Version 19/02/02
GE5
7
acquainted so late with the only original writer!" 50 But with time the comments became a little
more reserved. Evoking Walter von Stolzing, while he returned in a gondola to his Venetian
residence, he said to Cosima: "This one should have pleased Gobineau, so much arrogant knight
until Hans Sachs's arrival [...]." 5151 By saying this, Wagner probably thought of the quarrels that had
opposed them previously. In reality, it seems to us, Wagner had exhausted the charms of Gobineau's
personality and had pinpointed what was unacceptable in his system, 52 without rejecting him, nor to
take some distance. He knew the flaws and limits of the Frenchman, but in the relative intellectual
isolation that was his, 53 he could not do without him. Finally, Richard and Cosima Wagner were
taken by compassion for this abandoned being that was Gobineau. It was empathy that made them
act. Wagner had widely dispensed it throughout his life. Despite his narcissism, his hatreds, the
obsessions that so unpleasantly have tarnished his image, we also know that he was capable of love
and generosity. This is an opportunity to see a further proof of this humanity.
V - The meeting with Wagner was, as we have already indicated, the determining event that would
allow Gobineau to save his literary work. Already during Wagner's lifetime some of his followers
were put to work to inform the readers of the Bayreuther Blätter of the qualities of Gobineau's
work. 54 Nietzsche had been aware of Gobineau’s ideas, but never mentioned him. 55 But it was
Ludwig Schemann, a Wagnerian of the "second circle", one could say, who tried from the 90s to
defend the memory of Gobineau. With the help of Madame de la Tour, Schemann created in
February 1894 the Gobineau Vereinigung (Gobineau society) that had as object to make known and
defend the work of the Frenchman. Among the founders or first members one found noted
Wagnerians (Hans von Wolzogen, Friedrich Schön, Houston Stewart Chamberlain, Philip von
Eulenburg), personalities known for their nationalist opinions (Friedrich Lange, the founder of the
Deutschbund, the publisher Carl Trübner) and a certain number of French personalities (Paul
Bourget, Edouard Schuré, Albert Sorel, the Abbé Bremond, Georges de Lapouge) who joined
individually. It is thanks to the Gobineau Vereinigung that Gobineau's works - at least some of them
- benefited from a considerable distribution in Germany (more than 200 000 copies for La
Renaissance, let us remember). The Essay on the inequality of the human races (published from
1897 to 1901), on the other hand, enjoyed only a moderate success, competing as it was with the
simultaneous publication of Chamberlain's book 56 which, while being inspired by Gobineau’s
Essay, inverted its main conclusions. It is only at the beginning of the 20th century that Gobineau’s
work began to be known in France under very particular conditions. At once Gobineau was
suspected, not for his racism, but uniquely for his links with the enemy people and culture. French
public opinion could accept with difficulty that a national writer was defended so diligently by a
man of Prussian origin, professing nationalist opinions on top of it. 57
But it was Wagner who, after all, should be a victim of the conditions under which Gobineau's
work had been able to escape neglect. Inevitably Wagner's image has been associated with that of
Gobineau for reasons that have nothing to do with their ideas. 58 Wagner had certainly denounced
Gobineau's racism, but through a very difficult text that required a profound knowledge of
Gobineau's work. On the other hand, he had received the Frenchman on several occasions
respectfully in his house. After his death some of his followers saved the author of the Essai from
oblivion and defended his ideas with zealous enthusiasm. Appearances did not plead for his
innocence. Wagner had furthermore committed a great mistake that covers his entire work. One has
great difficulties to accept Wagner’s anti-Judaism that unfortunately lasted all his life (since Das
Judentum in der Musik 59 published in 1850 till his death). Evoking this fact lead - quasi
Version 19/02/02
GE5
8
automatically - to classify Wagner in the racist camp. This appears to be evident in this context.
This means, however, to ignore the radical transformation which the ancestral anti-Judaism
underwent in all of Europe around 1880. The expression “anti-Semitism“ appeared in 1879 in the
circle around the journalist Wilhelm Marr. 60 It translates - certainly inadequately - the transition
from the traditional concept to the “biological“ and racial aspects that became now dominant. It was
not anymore the adhesion to a religious community (which one could leave) which defined the Jew,
but an indelible membership in a race - which, by the way, one had great difficulties to define.
Although certain commentators question this point, we believe that Wagner had perceived this
evolution, notably by refusing to sign in 1880 the petition of Bernhard Förster 61 (called The people
against the invasion by the Jews). He also confided to his - Jewish - impresario Angelo Neumann 62
that he was completely foreign to these anti-Semitic movements. When Wagner asked the first
conductor of Parsifal, Hermann Levi - son of a rabbi and “Hofkapellmeister“ in Munich - to
convert to Christianity, he lacked at least a good portion of taste, but also showed, on the contrary,
his refutation of the existence of a Jewish race. Heldentum und Christentum allowed Wagner to
confirm this intuition and is thus an essential piece in this case. Certainly, this article does not
absolve Wagner from his responsibilities on the Jewish question, but it brings forth important
arguments to define his anti-Judaism et to refute certain accusation on the existence of a Wagnerian
racism, too frequently formulated.
At the end, the fatalist racism of Gobineau affected Wagner's faith that salvation is granted to
all Men as long as they believed in its possibility and really wished it. By its role of deterrent, the
reading of Gobineau’s work was for Wagner an important experience. It allowed him to confirm
him in his faith in Humanity and to assert even more strongly his conviction in the solidarity that
unites all beings in the face of suffering. If one studies these writings with humility and in good
faith, one finds that Wagner can be accused of many faults, but not of being a racist. And it is to
Gobineau, finally, that he owes this.
Translation: Wilhelm Guschlbauer
Notes
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Let us settle the question once and for all: Gobineau had no particle "de", nor was he count. His father had used the
"de" from time to time. The title "count" Gobineau had invented himself.
Letter of Gobineau to his wife 26 April 1871. Bibliothèque Nationale ms 14393
Mathilde-Marie Ruinart de Brimont (1838-1911), wife of the Italian diplomat Victor-Marie Sallier de La Tour.
Madame de la Tour lived apparently on good terms with her husband, but was actually separated. She concluded
with Gobineau what they called the "Norway-pact" swearing each other alliance and fidelity. From 1890 she
dedicated a good part of the end of her life to help Ludwig Schemann in his effort to "rescue" Gobineau's work.
Philipp von Eulenburg (1847-1922) also knew well the future emperor Wilhelm II.
Gobineau's letter to Marie Dragoumis of 23 November 1876 in Gobineau, Lettres à deux Athéniennes 1868-1881,
Kaufmann ed., Athens 1936.
Alexis de Tocqueville (1805-1858) was Foreign Secretary of the second cabinet Odilon Barrot (2 June to 31 October
1849).
Les Pléiades (The Pleiads), Plon ed., Paris, 1874. In A. Gobineau, Œuvres, Bibliothèque de la Pléiade, Gallimard
ed., Paris, 1987.
Nouvelles asiatiques, (Asian Novellas) Didier ed., Paris 1876. They had great success in Germany in Ludwig
Schemann's translation (in 1893), while only 400 copies were sold in France
La Renaissance. Scènes historiques, (The Renaissance, Historical scenes) Plon ed., Paris 1877. This book, translated
by Ludwig Schemann (first serialised in the Bayreuther Blätter from 1891 to 1894) had a considerable success in
Germany (about 200 000 copies sold, but less than 800 volumes in France.)
Essai sur l’inégalité des races humaines, (Essay on the inequality of the human races,) Didot ed., Paris, vol. 1 and
vol. 2 (1853) and vol. 3 and vol. 4 (1855). In France (until 1884) there were barely a thousand readers. Of the
German translation by Ludwig Schemann (1897-1901) 4000 copies were sold
Version 19/02/02
GE5
9
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
Histoire d’Ottar Jarl, pirate norvégien, conquérant du pays de Bray en Normandie, et de sa descendance, (Ottar
Jarl's history, Norwegian pirate, conqueror of the country of Bray in Normandy, and his descendants), Didier ed., on
1879, Paris.
Amadis, poème, (Amadis, poem), (1st part), Jouaust ed., Paris, 1876. 2nd ed., (1st, 2nd and 3rd part) Plon ed., Paris,
1887, vol. III, p. 19.
Letter of Gobineau to Cosima Wagner, 26 December 1880 [Correspondance, (N°3) p. 39-43] in Richard et Cosima
Wagner- Arthur Gobineau Correspondance (1880-1882), Librairie Nizet ed., Saint-Genouph, 2000. Edition presented,
established and annotated by Eric Eugène. This correspondence consists of 79 letters among which 49 are by Gobineau (43
to Cosima, 4 to Richard Wagner and 2 to Eva Wagner), 28 by Cosima and 2 by Richard Wagner himself.
Les Pléiades in A. Gobineau, Œuvres, Bibliothèque de la Pléiade, Gallimard, Ed., Paris, t. III. P. 19
Gobineau's letter to his sister of 2 June 1874 in Comte de Gobineau et mère Bénédicte de Gobineau,
Correspondance (1872-1882) Mercure de France ed., 1958.
Amadis (livre III, chant 8) cited par Jean Gaulmier in Gobineau, Œuvres vol. III, op. cit., Introduction, p. L IV.
Essai sur l’inégalité des races humaines, in Gobineau, Œuvres, vol. 1, pp. 342 to 343.
Essai, op. cit., p. 1164
Letter of Gobineau to Alexis de Tocqueville (20 mars 1856), in Correspondance A. de Tocqueville - A. de
Gobineau, Œuvres complètes d’A. de Tocqueville vol. IX, Gallimard ed., Paris, 1959.
Letter of Houston Stewart Chamberlain to Cosima Wagner of 15 November 1893, in Cosima Wagner und Houston
Stewart Chamberlain im Briefwechsel (1888-1908), Reclam ed., Leipzig, 1934. Se also Houston Stewart
Chamberlain, Die Grundlagen des XIX. Jahrhunderts, 28. Aufl., F. Bruckmann, München, 1942., S. 2666 - 2667
Essai, op. cit., p. 1002.
Essai, op. cit., pp. 324, 971 and 1092.
Essai, op. cit., pp. 1065 and 1066
C. Wagner, Tagebücher, Bd. I, 1869-1877; edited and commented by Martin Gregor-Dellin and Dietrich Mack, R.
Piper, 1976, München - Zürich; S. 1017 (29 november - 3 december 1876)
Madame de La Tour, in Les Dernières Années du Comte de Gobineau (The Last Years of the Count of Gobineau),
édition de Z. Zivojnovic. Thèse de l’université de Strasbourg, vol. I, p. 315.
(You see things as a philosopher and I as a businessman.) C. Wagner, Tagebücher, Bd. II, 1878-1883; edited and
commented by Martin Gregor-Dellin and Dietrich Mack, R. Piper, 1977, München - Zürich, S. 739 (18 May 1881)
C. Wagner, Tagebücher, Bd. II, S. 745 (3 June. 1881)
"Norman and Saxon, this is the right alliance, that is still fresh and healthy, that it shall flower and grow." C.
Wagner, Tagebücher, Bd. II, S. 745 (4 June 1881).
He had attended a representation of the Meistersinger von Nürnberg in Berlin on 16 December 1876.
Letter of Gobineau to Cosima Wagner, 8 June 1881, in R. et C. Wagner - A. Gobineau Correspondance 1880-1882),
op. cit., Correspondance, (N° 30) p. 113-115.
Letter of Gobineau to Cosima Wagner, 15 June 1881. Correspondance, (N° 31) p. 116-123.
Letter of Gobineau to Cosima Wagner, 29 July 1881. Correspondance, (N° 43), p. 155-159.
See for example the letter of Cosima Wagner to Gobineau, 10 April 1881. Correspondance, (N° 17) p. 91-93.
Before he was able to get hold of the volumes of the Essai, Wagner, accidentally, put his hands on the work of A.-F.
Pott with the rather massive title: The inequality of the human races mainly from the linguistic point of view, by
considering in particular the work carrying the same title of the count of Gobineau. Lemgo und Detmold. Ed.
Wagner read Pott from 13 February till 3 March and Cosima noted on 14 February (Tagebücher, Bd. II, S. 691, 15.
2. 1881): "Richard announces a new article, Heroism and Christianity".
Gobineau's article appeared in the Bayreuther Blätter May - June 1881. Wagner wrote an introduction to it
(Gesammelte Schriften und Dichtungen, E. W. Fritsch, Leipzig, 1898, [GSD], vol. 10, p. 33 - 35) in which he said
notably: "But, just as Schopenhauer's argument condemned the world and we were able to find the means to
examine the possibility of buying back this same world, it is thus allowed for us to hope that, by penetrating without
prejudice and unceremoniously into the chaos of impotence and ignorance that our new friend [Gobineau] reveals to
us, we shall find a hint that will make us take away our glance from this decline". The letter of Cosima Wagner to
Gobineau of 25 March 1881 [Correspondance, (N° 14) p. 84-85] was in the same vein. One will find the complete
commented text of Wagner's introduction in Eric Eugène, Wagner et Gobineau, le cherche midi, ed., Paris 1998 pp.
137 - 142.
Letter of Cosima Wagner to Gobineau, 27 March 1881. Correspondance, (N° 15), p.86-88.
GSD, 10, pp. 276 - 277
GSD, 10, p. 280
GSD, 10, pp. 284 - 285
See Carl-Friedrich Glasenapp, Das Leben Richard Wagners, Breitkopf und Härtel ed., Leipzig 1904-1911, vol. V, p.
769; and Ludwig Schemann, Gobineau's Rassenwerk, Frommann ed., Stuttgart 1910, p. 239. Even today Heldentum
und Christentum remains vague to more than one. One may read, for instance, the very fanciful interpretation that
Léon Poliakov gave in Le mythe aryen (The Aryan Myth), Calmann-Levy ed., Paris, 1971, p. 331.
Version 19/02/02
GE5
10
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
One will find the complete commented text of Heldentum und Christentum in Eric Eugène, Wagner et Gobineau,
op. cit., pp. 142 - 164.
Essai, p. 195
C. Wagner, Tagebücher, Bd. II, S. 811, (20 October 1881)
Ludwig Schemann (1852-1938), librarian at the University of Göttingen, was a regular visitor to Wahnfried. He
rescued Gobineau's work by translating it and having it published in Germany. Gobineau's works were [re-]
discovered in France only through the work of Schemann. About Schemann and his role in fostering Gobinism, see
Eric Eugène, op. cit., pp. 185 - 196.
Letter of Gobineau to Cosima Wagner, 25 September 1881. Correspondance, (N° 48) p. 170-173.
Letter of Richard Wagner to Gobineau, 10 February 1882. Correspondance, (N° 61) p. 196-197.
Reported by Hans von Wolzogen, the anecdote can be found in Ludwig Schemann, Gobineau, Eine Biographie,
Trübner ed., 1913-1916, Bd. II, S. 566.
C. Wagner, Tagebücher, Bd. II, S. 1032 (25 October 1882)
The article entitled Graf Arthur Gobineau. Ein Erinnerungsbild aus Wahnfried (Count Arthur Gobineau.
Recollections from Wahnfried) appeared in Bayreuther Blätter, November - December 1882.
C. Wagner, Tagebücher, Bd. II, S. 664 (13 January 1881).
C. Wagner, Tagebücher, Bd. II, S. 1048-49 (15 November 1881).
Let's try not to fall into the trap of anachronism of thought. It is enough to observe that Wagner's answers are all the
more significant, since thinkers like Alexander von Humbolt, Prosper Merimée or Ernest Renan had found nothing
to criticise in the ideas of Gobineau’s Essai. The only personalities in the 19th century who reacted to them were A.
de Tocqueville and R. Wagner.
Except for Franz Liszt (and still in a very particular way) Wagner had, strictly speaking, no interlocutor of his age
anymore at the end of his life. His regular followers (Glasenapp, Stein, Wolzogen....) were much younger and could
not satisfy Wagner on this level. Gobineau, in spite of the difference of status between both men, was in a similar
situation as Wagner. If there was conflict, it was intellectually fertile. It is may be here that one can find one of the
keys to the relationship between Wagner and Gobineau.
Heinrich von Stein published a comment on La Renaissance (Bayreuther Blätter, January 1881), Carl-Friedrich
Glasenapp wrote on Les Réligions et les Philosophies dans l'Asie Centrale (Bayreuther Blätter, January to July
1881) and Hans von Wolzogen analysed the Essai (Bayreuther Blätter, April 1882 to June 1883).
But nothing indicates that Nietzsche had read Gobineau. We have only the testimony of his sister Elisabeth, not a
very reliable source, however. No books by Gobineau were found in Nietzsche’s library (but could have they been
stolen?). Further, there is no reference to Gobineau in Nietzsche’s work. On the other hand, Nietzsche knew about
Gobineau as a letter to his sister in october 1888 and particularly one to Peter Gast of 10 december 1888 attest. The
latter had reviewed Nietzsche’s Der Fall Wagner in the journal Der Kunstwart, edited by Ferdinand Avenarius. Gast
had assimilated Nietzsche’s “aristocratism“ with that of Gobineau “who had the good taste to distance himself from
Parsifal“ (in Der Kunstwart N°4, p. 55, 15 nov. 1888. We have nevertheless no proof of this so-called
“distanciation“). In this letter Nietzsche congratulated Gast and insisted that “[...] the allusion to count Gobineau [...]
is a masterpiece.“ (See Nietzsche, Gesammelte Briefe Bd. 1, herausgegeben von Peter Gast und Arthus Seidl,
Schuster & Loeffler, 1900, Brief 273.)
A study of the mutual influences between Nietzsche and Gobineau (which Alois Riehl had suggested for the first
time in 1897) remains to be done. May it suffice here that Zarathustra seems to be influences by Gobineau’s
Histoire des Perses and that the “blond Germanic brute“ has a certain affinity with Gobineau’s hero. Nietzsche’s
positions, however, appear to us incompatible with Gobineau’s philosophy of History and his absolute pessimism.
Houston Stewart Chamberlain, Die Grundlagen des Neunzehnten Jahrhunderts (The Foundations of the XIXth
century) 1st ed., F. Bruckmann ed., München, 1899. For Chamberlain the superior race was not situated in a
mythical past, it was to come, produced by a politic of racial selection. This superior race to be created, Chamberlain
saw developing in Germany from German stock (which he called Teutons). So there are many fundamental
differences with Gobineau. Chamberlain's work, that reached twenty-nine editions until 1944, sold about 400 000
copies in Germany.
Schemann was, indeed, member of the Alldeutscher Verband (the pangermanic League).
There are few works dedicated to Wagner that are not seriously inaccurate about Gobineau. To spare the reader a
boring litany one will give only two examples. In The Wagner Compendium, A guide to Wagner's Life and Music.
(Thames and Hudson Ltd., 1992) under the direction of Barry Millington, one can find in the chapter dedicated to
Wagner's contemporaries a note presenting Gobineau which is almost entirely false (see on this subject E. Eugène
op. cit., pp. 14 - 17). As for Gottfried Wagner, he writes in Wer nicht mit dem Wolf heult (Kiepenheuer & Witsch,
Köln, 1997, p. 93: "Under the influence of the racist philosopher Gobineau, Richard Wagner's anti-Semitism
intensified until it reached the disastrous end of biological racism of the Bayreuth period". The less hostile reader
can nevertheless wonder how Wagner's anti-Semitism would have been able to intensify under the influence of a
man who was not an anti-Semite (see above note 52).
GSD 5, 66 - 85
Version 19/02/02
GE5
11
60
61
62
See Helmut Berding, Moderner Antisemitismus in Deutschland. Suhrkamp Verlag, Frankfurt am Main, 1988. This
expression was supposedly already used earlier in a polemic between Moritz Steinschneider and Ernest Renan.
Bernhard Förster (who had married Elisabeth Nietzsche in 1885) was an anti-Semitic and nationalistic ideological
agitator who organised a “ethnically pure“ colony in Paraguay (La Nueva Germania) that ended in disaster.
Bernhard Förster wrote a few articles in the Bayreuther Blätter (e.g. in March 1882 about vivisection) and was for
this reason classified as a Wagnerian follower. Wagner was rather reserved about this individual as Cosima noted in
her Journal (“R. had not much confidence in him“. Tagebücher II, S. 1109, 9. 2. 1883). Förster’s petition was signed
by about 300 000 persons and demanded the limitation of immigration of Jews, their exclusion from the Civil
Service and their registration on a special list.
See Angelo Neumann, Erinnerungen an Richard Wagner, Calman-Levy, ed., Paris 1908, p. 198
Version 19/02/02
GE5
12