Brecht’s Political Children Poetry – Ars versus utilitas

Abstract

Bertolt Brecht (1898–1956) was one of the most renowned political writers of the twentieth century, whose dramatic and lyrical texts had a strong impact on German post-war literature. His poems for children occupy a significant position in his impressive lyrical oeuvre, showing both clear political tendencies and a distinct didactic note characteristic of his work overall. His poetry is of significant interest in the context of the discussion of children’s literature as a specific kind of literature, which straddles the boundary between art (ars) and didactic literature, aiming at a pedagogic message (utilitas). Brecht‘s poems from various periods are analysed in this paper, in order to discuss the axiological problem of children’s literature, which critics have often been denying its artistic value. His texts are regarded as examples of crosswriting, being written for children, the youth and adults. Brecht himself did not make any distinctions between adult and children’s poetry, as he did not underrate his youngest readers, and therefore he did not adapt his texts, which resulted in a twofold consequence: their artistic value has not been questioned; instead, their appropriateness for children was brought into question. However, Brecht published his children’s poetry in cycles with univocal titles “Children Poems” (Kinderlieder) in 1939 and 1950, and therefore he himself explicitly identified the poems as belonging to children’s literature. He used specific children’s poetry genres like the counting rhyme, poems on alphabet, animals, and nature, dealing with the children’s reality and everyday life, with family and political events. He also tended to use adequate language and style, which children could easily understand. Brecht’s intention was clear: he wanted to encourage young people to think critically and to feel empowered to change the present and influence their own future. Therefore, he used parody, irony, satire, symbols, allegory, parable, open endings, which made his text ambiguous, in concordance with the rest of his work and his own values, which he wanted to convey. Therefore, his poetry is authentic and artistic, not only didactic, as he discusses the social injustice and the position of children, in particular girls and the poor, as well as the agents of socialisation that put the future of the youngest population in danger (parents, teachers, priests, politicians, and the police). As Brecht did not always state his morals explicitly, his poems are sometimes considered to be difficult and inadequate for children. But he did not choose to be explicit because he believed in children’s power of understanding, and wanted to activate them, instead of merely passing his messages and ideas so that they be passively received. All things considered, it can be concluded that Brecht’s children’s poetry undisputedly poses a valuable part of artistic children literature, and it cannot be denied either artistic value or adequacy for the youngest recipients. As it coalesces ars and utilitas, it can be regarded as “hybrid” literature, belonging to both categories, thought traditionally sharply separated and valued differently, due to obsolete attitudes, which need to be adapted to present and future.