The Enigma of Kaspar Hauser / Bruno S. by John A. A. Logan
Just
returning from a very late night walk (less traffic, less exhaust fumes to
consume, less people…yes, more slow-trawling police cars checking you out as
you walk, which is aggravating, but still we are not at the stage of Ray
Bradbury’s “Pedestrian” yet where any lone strollers will be picked up off the
pavement by a robotic police car and spirited away)…anyway, as I was saying,
just back from a very late night walk finishing on a hill, I sat down in my
sweat and turned on the TV, Freeview Channel 15, to see that a film was just
beginning, the titles still on the screen…The
Enigma of Kaspar Hauser…
I
had heard of this 1974 film over the years but never seen it. I knew it was
directed by Werner Herzog. Herzog’s film, Aguirre,
Wrath of God, has always haunted me a little…
Bruno
Schleinstein plays Kaspar Hauser in the film.
A
41-year-old self-taught street musician and forklift driver, son of a
prostitute, and a beaten child who had spent most of his youth, 23 years, in
mental institutions, Schleinstein had never acted before playing Kaspar. Later,
after Schleinstein’s 2010 death, Herzog would describe him as the best actor he
had ever worked with – “There is no one who comes close to him.”
The
film opens with Kaspar chained in the tiny cellar where he has lived in
isolation for his first 17 years, with only his toy wooden horse for company,
and the man who comes to feed him. One day that man forces him to his feet,
carries him off into the countryside, has a go at teaching him how to walk and
talk a little, then abandons him in the main square of the town of Nuremberg.
The year is 1828, and the appearance of Kaspar arouses great interest in the
various townspeople.
Gradually,
Kaspar is taught how to eat at a table, speak, dress, think, philosophise,
read, write, and play the piano. But he always learns in his own particular
way, as though the furnace desert of solitude he had spent his first 17 years
in has made him so fundamentally different in nature from his new fellows, that
it must inform and adjust any information, art, or practice that they teach
him. This is alternately infuriating and hilarious for those who try to teach
Kaspar. Nothing about him is quite “right”. He can learn philosophy, argue
logic, but it will not be quite within the bounds of reason and sanity as those
commodities are known in 19th century Germany (or for that matter,
in the 21st Century technological modernity we inhabit now). It is
as though, at the remote heart of Kaspar, lies a conscientious objection to
everything his new teachers are telling him constitutes objective reality. The
new data just doesn’t measure up to the power and depth of the education he had
received from those 17 years in the darkness of the cellar. There’s a wonderful
scene where Kaspar meets a professional logician and philosopher across a
table, someone who has been set on him to measure the sanity of his mind, and
Kaspar, knowing that he is meeting an emissary of a kind of violence in the
guise of this emissary of a kind of knowledge, sets about applying his own
intellect to the question posed by the logician. He fails to give the correct
answer, in the eyes of the logician, but, as the only witness notes, Kaspar’s
answer is clearer than the supposedly correct answer. (And much funnier).
The
film ends with Kaspar’s dreams and visions, and by then the whole film will
have come to seem like a helter skelter panoply of dream and vision, for the
viewer, and for Kaspar, in comparison to the dead monotony of the 17 years in
the lonely cellar, in which, when Kaspar is asked later, he says he never
dreamed of anything at all.
Roger
Ebert wrote in his 2007 review of the film, ‘Kaspar speaks as a man to whom
every day is a mystery: "My coming to this world was a terribly hard
fall." And think of the concept being expressed when he says, "It
dreamed to me ..." In Herzog the line between fact and fiction is a
shifting one. He cares not for accuracy but for effect, for a transcendent
ecstasy. "Kaspar Hauser" tells its story not as a narrative about its
hero, but as a mosaic of striking behavior and images: A line of penitents
struggling up a hillside, a desert caravan led by a blind man, a stork
capturing a worm. These images are unrelated to Kaspar except in the way they reflect
and illuminate his struggle. The last thing Herzog is interested in is
"solving" this lonely man's mystery. It is the mystery that attracts
him.’
In
his 2010 obituary for Bruno S. in the Guardian, Ronald Bergan quotes Herzog at
length: "Bruno is a man whose life in his youth was catastrophic and
obviously made him a 'difficult' person to deal with. Sometimes he would stop
work by ranting against the injustices of the world. I would stop the entire
team in their tracks." Bergan notes that Herzog would tell them:
"Even if it takes three or four hours of non-stop Bruno speaking about
injustice we... would all listen. I would always make physical contact with
him. I would always grab him and just hold his wrist. Otherwise, he is a man of
phenomenal abilities and phenomenal depth and suffering. It translates on the
screen like nothing I have ever done translates on to a screen. He is, for me,
the Unknown Soldier of Cinema."
Perhaps,
though, it is best to end with Bruno S.’s own words on himself.
He
often referred to himself in the third person.
In
the film, Stroszek, his second and
last directed by Herzog, Bruno said, “Bruno is still being pushed around, not
physically but spiritually; here they hurt you with a smile.”
By
the late 1970s, the short-lived fame from the two films with Herzog had ended,
and Bruno S. made one memorable statement about what happened to himself when
that fame ended, and again he made that statement in the third person -
“Everybody
threw him away.”
Comments
I was reading the comment section on YT and came across this comment:"He was so gentle and kind. Incredibly sweet, intelligent and talented.He was a very special man that seemed as if he came from another world.
I will always love him dearly."
He seemed like an such an extraordinary man. I think that I would have like to have known him.