Das Biedermeier

Biedermeier, Das, a German style usually regarded as characteristic of the period 1815-48. Its use was originally pejorative, and the name derives from the fictitious naïve and unintentionally comic poet Gottlieb Biedermaier, lampooned in the Munich humorous weekly Fliegende Blätter. For details concerning these publications see Eichrodt, L., Kussmaul, A., and Sauter, F. Biedermeier (the spelling with ‘e’ is now universal) is compounded of ‘bieder’, suggesting a somewhat contemptuous sense of ‘worthy’, and Meier, which (in various forms, including Meyer, Maier, and Mayer) is a common surname. In the second half of the 19th c. Biedermeier was proverbially used to express amused contempt of the parochial lives and unpolitical attitudes prevailing among the populace of the states and principalities of the German Confederation (see Deutscher Bund).

At the beginning of the 20th c. a consciousness grew that this period had, at least in painting, in interior decoration, in furniture, and in architecture, a style which was sober, modest, unpretentious, and yet exhibited a prepossessing elegance. The spurious gilt of the style Empire gave way to homely, solid, impeccable craftsmanship, and a simple dignity replaced expansive pomp. Comfortable, though unluxurious, domestic interiors in subdued daylight or lit by oil lamps became favourite subjects of painters (e.g. F. Kersting, A. von Menzel, M. von Schwind). And an element of humour was extracted from the quainter semi-Dickensian aspects of this world by C. Spitzweg.

The aptness of the term ‘Biedermeier’ to literature has, however, remained a subject of continuing controversy. The usual contention has been that the literature of the middle class before the industrial revolution and in the days of the repressive police state organized in the age of Metternich was one of withdrawal from politics and retreat into a private, domestic sphere; and that an attitude of personal quietism, inner security, and abstention from passion was simultaneously promoted. The ‘quiet’ writers to whom these ‘Biedermeier’ aspects have, in greater or lesser degree, been ascribed are poets such as A. von Droste-Hülshoff, J. Kerner, and E. Mörike, writers of fiction such as A. Stifter, B. Auerbach, and K. Immermann, and dramatists, especially Austrian, such as F. Grillparzer, E. Bauernfeld, and F. Raimund. Yet none of these writers could be fully comprehended under the designation ‘Biedermeier’ which has inherent in it a suggestion of mediocrity and ‘averageness’ which all the writers mentioned transcend. A more reasonable attitude suggests that ‘Biedermeier’ elements are discoverable in these authors, but the true ‘Biedermeier’ men of letters, if they exist, are to be found among writers of the second, or less than second, rank, such as K. J. P. Spitta, J. Rank, A. Weill, or even F. W. Hackländer, who might be said to have invented a ‘militärisches Biedermeier’. As a designation of period, ‘Biedermeier’ is only truly acceptable as an expression of manners, fashion, and domestic style in the years between ‘Empire’ splendour and ‘new capitalist’ affluent ornamentation and elaboration. Historically the idea is vitiated by the struggles of the Burschenschaft and the revolutionary agitation and opposition of men such as F. Lassalle, F. List, and G. Büchner, and, on the literary side, apart from Büchner, by the Jung-Deutschland group (see Junges Deutschland). The term has been extended to include men of letters writing during the period of the foundation of the German Empire in 1871. A comprehensive revaluation of ‘Biedermeier’ has been undertaken by F. Sengle, Biedermeierzeit. Deutsche Literatur im Spannungsfeld zwischen Restauration und Revolution 1815-1848, 3 vols., 1971, 1972, 1980. (See also Vormärz.)