Mimesis: The Representation of Reality in Western Literature

Mimesis: The Representation of Reality in Western Literature (1953) is a work of literary criticism by Erich Auerbach, a Romance philologist and literature professor who worked in Germany, Istanbul, and then the United States. In Mimesis, Auerbach traces the development of several important patterns or themes throughout Western literary history; the most prominent of these patterns is the separation or mingling of styles (high and low styles). His study begins with Homer and the Judeo-Christian Bible and ends with the works of Modernists Virginia Woolf and Marcel Proust.

This guide references the 2003 Princeton University Press 50th-anniversary edition.

Summary

Erich Auerbach’s Mimesis was originally published in Switzerland (in German) in 1946 and then translated into English and published in the United States in 1953. It is a work of literary criticism conducted from the perspective of a Romance philologist. Because of Auerbach’s philology background, the book is more than simply literary criticism; it explores sociocultural and historical influences on each text the book considers, and Auerbach provides passages in their original languages alongside translations. Many critics also call the text’s critical method historicism, since Auerbach consistently ties historical perspectives and trends into the literary works he studies. Auerbach studies a variety of literary forms, including epic poetry, plays, historical texts, memoirs, and novels.

Each chapter of Mimesis opens with a passage from a literary work on which the chapter will focus, and most chapters include passages from anywhere between one to two other works from the same period. The passage from the first text is always translated, while other passages are often left in their original languages. The languages within which Auerbach works are French, Italian, Latin, English, and German, and he also references ancient Greek works like Homer’s Odyssey. The primary focus for Auerbach’s study of such a wide range of works is serious literary representation of reality.

Auerbach opens Mimesis with a comparison of Homer’s Odyssey and the Judeo-Christian Bible, studying the ways that they represent reality. Two elements are of particular note in his study of these two texts: 1) foregrounding events versus more shrouded narratives; and 2) the separation or mingling of styles. He observes that in Homer, everything is foregrounded; even if he turns to a “flashback,” the events of that flashback are foregrounded in such a way as to make the listener forget about the tension of the scene they just left. In the Bible, however, much is left unsaid.

The issue of the separation or mingling of styles becomes the most primary theme that Auerbach traces in the text. By “styles,” Auerbach means high (elevated) or low (or often comic) literary style. At the height of the separation of styles in works of classical French literature, the separation of styles insists that upper-class people and gods must be treated seriously and in an elevated style of writing, while those of the lower classes, or banal topics related to the everyday, must be treated with a low style. Auerbach explains that the high style has not quite reached this level in Homer, since he does represent the everyday lives of the characters, but Homer still illustrates the direction such a focus on “high” style would take through a focus on the upper classes and gods. The Bible, however, provides future writers with a blueprint for what Auerbach calls a mixture of styles. Despite the fact that Biblical narrative describes sublime encounters with God, it reveals how those encounters happen in the everyday lives of his followers. And when the New Testament arrives, he explains, the very nature of Christ’s time on earth requires a mixture rather than separation of styles, since God sent his Son to live on earth in humble circumstances and surrounded by other people from humble circumstances.

Auerbach then moves to works of classical and late-Latin literature and history, exploring their use of the separation of styles and their lack of an awareness of historicity (in other words, a lack of consideration of historical or social causes for events). After the late-Latin works are early works of French courtly literature, where the separation of styles primarily comes to the fore. These works have yet to grasp a sense of historicity except in relation to religious events (See: Index of Terms), and they maintain a focus on those of the upper classes. These chapters are also where Auerbach begins a more in-depth exploration of the impact of one’s society and culture on literary output. For example, although most courtly romances have an element of the fantastic in them, they can be seen as “realistic” because they represent the courtly values of the time. This section also addresses Western literature’s transition into the vernacular, both through the courtly romances and through Dante Alighieri, on whose skill with the vernacular Auerbach places great value. The early courtly romances reveal a lingering awkwardness of style as writers transition from Latin to the vernacular, but Dante reveals a growing skill and beauty in the vernacular. Dante’s chapter, “Farinata and Cavalcante,” is also important for Auerbach’s exploration of Dante’s mixture of styles. Dante provides one of the first works that has a sense of historicity because each of his characters has a clear background and life outside of the Inferno. He also places the grotesque (the sinners, their punishments, and accounts of their earthly lives) alongside the sublime (consideration of God and of salvation). Up to this point in history, Dante provides the clearest mixture of styles outside of the Biblical narratives.

After Dante, Auerbach discusses the works of Giovanni Boccaccio, Antoine de la Sale, François Rabelais, and Michel de Montaigne. He explores how Boccaccio takes the mixture of styles further, using it to depict sensual love and everyday life rather than just Christian ideals. Each author from here on carries this trend further, using the mixture of styles inherited from Christianity to explore secular events and concerns. Study of the essays of de Montaigne in this section reveal some of the first forays into more personal, individual realms of reality as de Montaigne explores his more personal experience of the world, prefiguring the highly subjective realism of the 20th-century Modernists.

The next few chapters move further into the literature of humanism and the Renaissance. The chapter on William Shakespeare, “The Weary Prince,” reveals how far Shakespeare took the mixture of styles by including consideration of an elevated character’s fatigue and interactions with lower-class, comic characters. Auerbach notes, however, that even Shakespeare maintains serious treatment of upper-class characters only, relegating lower-class characters to comedy. Don Quixote is notable in this section for Auerbach’s exploration of a near-switch in levels of style. Don Quixote’s madness and lack of connection to reality might normally relegate his representation to that of the “low,” or comic, type, but author Miguel de Cervantes portrays him seriously, illustrating the honor and dignity of Quixote despite his madness.

The final section of the book explores 19th- and 20th-century works. Chapter 17, which studies the only German text in the book, is notable primarily for its personal connection to Auerbach. As a Romance philologist, it might be expected that he focus on literature of the Romance languages, but his study claims to cover Western literature. He also briefly references the fascism growing in his homeland during his own time, and he connects it to the rampant traditionalism that kept hold of German literature and culture in the 19th and early 20th century.

This section is also notable for the increasing sense of historicity in each of the works studied. Auerbach particularly hones in on the historicity of Stendhal’s work, claiming that it cannot be understood without the reader having at least a basic grasp of the sociocultural and historical issues of Stendhal’s time, which is something new in literature. The separation of styles also loses its hold on the literatures of this time; all classes may now be treated equally in terms of style, and considerations of importance may be found even in the banality of everyday life. Auerbach ends with a study of Virginia Woolf’s To The Lighthouse, exploring how realism has transitioned from a more grand view of peoples and history into an intensely personal and subjective form through the Modernist propensity for representing reality through the experiences and thoughts of the characters.

Auerbach ends Mimesis with an Epilogue that includes his reasons for writing the book and an explanation for the work’s peculiar method. He explains that he was limited in his access to critical editions of the texts he chose while in Istanbul, and he chose to embark on the writing process by tracing a handful of themes and patterns within Western literature.