# Wagner's Ring: What is the Wanderer's purpose in Siegfried?



## Spectrum (Mar 12, 2009)

I have recently re-read the libretto of Richard Wagner's _Siegfried_. I don't understand the role of Wotan (the Wanderer). Why is he there? I don't understand his motivation for doing any of the things he does.

In act I he comes into Mime's cave and offers Mime advice, bullies Mime into answering questions in return, and leaves with a curse on Mime (that Mime will be killed by Siegfried). Why does he do this? Does he want to indirectly help Siegfried slay Fafner and win the ring - and if so, how can he do that without breaking his covenant with Fafner (as he did with Siegmund, with tragic consequences)?

In act II Wotan comes to the Neidhöhle to taunt Alberich. Why? Why does he tell Alberich about Siegfried? Why does he not worry at all that Alberich's cunning might win him the ring from Siegfried (as indeed it almost does, through Hagen)? If Wotan is really trying to help Siegfried, ought he not to try to get rid of Alberich?

In act III Wotan awakens Erda, ostensibly to ask her some questions. He rants a lot, then asks her some vague, half-assed questions. When Erda does not immediately answer his questions, he rants some more and then puts her back to sleep and leaves. Why?

Immediately after that he tries to stop Siegfried from awakening Brünnhilde. Why? He says that Siegfried will break Wotan's power if he frees Brünnhilde - but didn't he just say that he longed to die?

Can someone help me understand what is going on? Thanks!


----------



## amfortas (Jun 15, 2011)

Some good questions. Here are my thoughts.

You forget one key feature of Act I: The Wanderer tells Mime that only he who has not learned fear will forge the sword anew (and also claim the prize of Mime's head). I think this is indeed a case of Wotan still trying to influence events, conveying a message that will lead to Siegfried repairing the sword and using it to slay the dragon and gain the ring. I suppose that, since this is a more indirect kind of assistance (rather than something more active, like leaving a sword in a tree as he did for Siegmund), Wotan feels he can get away with it. And in fact, it's not entirely clear that Mime manages to convey the message to Siegfried, who appears to start recasting the sword on his own initiative anyway.

I'm less sure about Act II, but my general sense has always been that Wotan doesn't see Alberich as much of a threat at this point. Siegfried has forged the sword, and it is only a matter of time before he slays the dragon. I think Wotan enjoys taunting Alberich because he believes the dwarf has been rendered powerless. This is partly because Alberich is still locked in the petty struggle for wealth and power, while Wotan has already set his sights on a higher destiny for the world, even if it involves his own downfall.

In Act III, you again leave out perhaps the most important element: Wotan announces to Erda that the end of the gods, which once so terrified him, no longer fills him with dread; he now wills his own end. I think this has been a hard-won epiphany for him (indeed, earlier in that same scene he asked Erda how a "swift-turning wheel can be stopped"). And it's a resolution he struggles to maintain as the story continues. 

We see this when Siegfried approaches. Wotan allows himself an understandable indulgence: he wants to meet his grandson face to face, and to be admired and appreciated by the younger generation before he leaves the world to them. But things don't go well. Wotan finds out that a truly free hero like Siegfried has no reverence for the gods or the older generation. Siegfried speaks rudely, knocks off the old man's hat, and orders him out of the way. To his own surprise, Wotan's old pride flares up, along with his instinct for self-preservation. He raises his spear, barring Siegfried's way. But there's no turning back the clock; the time of the old order has passed. Siegfried's sword breaks Wotan's spear, and the god realizes, with quiet resignation, that the tide has truly turned against him: "Pass on; I cannot prevent you."


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Amfortas' explanations make sense to me, but I think we should also keep in mind the fact that the librettos to the _Ring_ operas were written in reverse order, as Wagner recognized the need to dramatize events antecedent to each drama in turn, events originally related only in backstory narrations. Wagner's original conception was for a single opera, "Siegfried's Death," which grew through the above process into a tetralogy. The composer-librettist was confronted with the problems of how much of the backstory to dramatize in preceding installments and how much of various personages' narrations of past events to retain or remove. Wotan's appearances in _Siegfried_ would have been more obviously useful before _Das Rheingold_ and _Die Walkure_ were conceived; once those operas were added to the cycle, Wagner would have had to decide how much of the god's presence as the Wanderer, and how much of what he had to say, was still needed. I've always felt that the question scene with Mime is the least compelling scene in the _Ring_, dramatically and musically. But given the difficulties inherent in he way the cycle developed, a dramatic lapse should probably not be unexpected somewhere along the way. I do feel, though, that the concept of Wotan as "Wanderer," commenting upon he course of events more than influencing them, is a poetically just one, and shows us the growth in Wotan's perception of the necessity and desirability of withdrawing from the action and allowing the necessity of "das Ende," words uttered in despair in _Die Walkure_ but now, with only a futile burst of the old godly pride when confronted with his supercilious grandson, embraced. This is most compellingly expressed in the third act: I find the scene with Erda quite moving, preparing us spiritually for the _Gotterdammerung_, in its sense of the old order passing, of Erda descending to her final sleep, and Wotan ready to mount his throne and await his ravens' message that the end has come.

In sum, I find the Wanderer's role in Siegfried to be one, not so much of moving events along, as one of letting us see Wotan's understanding and acceptance of his new position in a story which is larger than he or any of his ambitions and schemes could ever be. Some might criticize Wagner for retaining as much of the character's presence in act one as he did - thereby slowing the action - or even question the usefulness of that scene at all; Wagner may well have debated the matter himself. But on the whole I find that the Wanderer's serene presence, expressed in his majestic music, is essential to keeping in view the larger cosmic drama which gives the story of Siegfried's exploits its meaning. Throughout the _Ring_, Wotan is never far from our awareness for long; even in _Gotterdammerung_, where he does not physically appear, his drama hovers palpably over the whole epic story - indeed sits at the center of it. Wagner was right to keep him before our eyes until that moment of final defeat when, picking up the broken spear which had represented his power, he walks off quietly into the mist and darkness.


----------



## amfortas (Jun 15, 2011)

I agree that we should keep the composition of the Ring in mind--not just that it was written in reverse order, but that it was created over about a quarter of a century. In fashioning such a sprawling, complex work over such a lengthy period, Wagner inevitably had changes of heart, second thoughts that can show up as seeming inconsistencies. What we make of these moments is another question.

A case in point: Near the end of Act I of Götterdämmerung, Waltraute poignantly describes Wotan holed up in Valhall, surrounded by his heroes, awaiting the end. But the god is heard to mutter that if only the ring were returned to the Rhinemaidens, the curse would be lifted and gods spared.

On the face of it, this seems to go against the awareness of inevitable doom, and the stoic resignation in the face of it, we had seen from Wotan previously. It also goes against the actual course of events: the ring is indeed returned to the Rhinemaidens, but the gods perish anyway. Since Wotan's prediction seems both psychologically inconsistent and dramatically misleading, why does it appear at all? 

It's possible that this is a real inconsistency on Wagner's part, perhaps a textual strata from an earlier conception of the drama. But even if that is the case, I think the text as it stands offers interesting interpretive possibilities. From that perspective, Wotan's forlorn wish may be seen as the last of the god's many vacillations over the course of the drama, a final, flickering hope arising in desperation even when he knows, deep down, that hope has already been extinguished. Such a view gives added poignance to Brünnhilde's benediction just before the end: "Rest, rest, thou god." The conflicted, self-tormented Wotan can finally be at peace, no longer struggling to accept the end he faced from the very beginning.


----------



## Danforth (May 12, 2013)

I see Wotan's statement differently. He says, ""Des tiefen Rheines Töchtern / gäbe den Ring sie wieder zurück, / von des Fluches Last / erlöst wär' Gott und Welt!" ("If she would return the ring to the Rhine's daughters in its depths, from the weight of the curse would the gods and the world be freed"). His word is "erlöst" (redeemed/freed); he does not technically say that the gods will be spared. Thus, one could still see his statement as one of resignation: the gods and the world are indeed freed from the weight of the curse when the ring is returned to the Rhine--but their destruction is part of that redemption.


----------



## amfortas (Jun 15, 2011)

That's a very careful and sensitive reading of the text, and your interpretation seems entirely plausible. 

Now that I think about it, my understanding of the scene is derived in part from the urgency with which Waltraute entreats Brünnhilde to relinquish the ring, maintaining that "Der Welt Unheil / haftet sicher an ihm." ("The world's fate/disaster depends on it.") It's not absolutely clear in the text, but my feeling is that Waltraute hopes to effect a real change of outcome, an eleventh-hour rescue, rather than the more esoteric redemption you suggest.

Of course, even if that's the case, it's possible Waltraute misinterpreted Wotan's words, read more hope into them than the god intended--which would add an interesting layer of irony to the scene.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Danforth said:


> I see Wotan's statement differently. He says, ""Des tiefen Rheines Töchtern / gäbe den Ring sie wieder zurück, / von des Fluches Last / erlöst wär' Gott und Welt!" ("If she would return the ring to the Rhine's daughters in its depths, from the weight of the curse would the gods and the world be freed"). His word is "erlöst" (redeemed/freed); he does not technically say that the gods will be spared. Thus, one could still see his statement as one of resignation: the gods and the world are indeed freed from the weight of the curse when the ring is returned to the Rhine--but their destruction is part of that redemption.


Your interpretation is given weight by the related "inconsistency" in _Rheingold_, where Erda warns Wotan against the curse of the ring and tells him to give it up, but also says that everything that exists must have an end. Wotan, evidently failing to appreciate the second point, gives up the ring and proceeds to hatch his grand scheme for a redeeming hero - which only, and inevitably, turns back on him and effects his downfall. But I also think amfortas is right to point out that Wotan doesn't have an easy time coming to terms with this. It's what makes him so - well, so very human!

The concept of death as redemption rather than tragedy - or, sometimes, death as tragic yet redemptive - is a constant theme in Wagner's works, from _Dutchman_ to _Parsifal_. The psychological and mythical (the same thing in Wagner) meaning of death in these symbolic dramas - in which so much cannot be taken at face value - is another question, but I think there's no doubt that this is the ultimate perspective in which to view "das Ende" of Wotan and the fulfillment of Erda's warning.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

amfortas said:


> That's a very careful and sensitive reading of the text, and your interpretation seems entirely plausible.
> 
> Now that I think about it, my understanding of the scene is derived in part from the urgency with which Waltraute entreats Brünnhilde to relinquish the ring, maintaining that "Der Welt Unheil / haftet sicher an ihm." ("The world's fate/disaster depends on it.") It's not absolutely clear in the text, but my feeling is that Waltraute hopes to effect a real change of outcome, an eleventh-hour rescue, rather than the more esoteric redemption you suggest.
> 
> Of course, even if that's the case, it's possible Waltraute misinterpreted Wotan's words, read more hope into them than the god intended--which would add an interesting layer of irony to the scene.


Not only irony, but poignancy. If the necessity of his world ending is a crisis for Wotan, it must be something quite incomprehensible to Waltraute, and then to Brunnhilde as well, who doesn't achieve full understanding until the end of the story (in fact, it is Brunnhilde's final enlightenment that brings about the end of the story).

It's typical in Wagner that characters act without awareness of the deeper meaning and consequences of their actions, which may lead to their deaths. This is, on the face of it, a tragic and pessimistic view of life. And yet in most of his work there are forces at work which lead these characters to higher states of consciousness. Death may thus represent, ultimately, not an end but a phase of spiritual growth, a transformation. Each of Wagner's mythical dramas treats this in a different way, but the _Ring_ represents a climax and turning point: _Gotterdammerung_ opens the way for, and points forward to, _Parsifal_, in which the hero - a virtual reincarnation of Siegfried - can now reject illusion rather than succumb to it.


----------



## Spectrum (Mar 12, 2009)

Thanks for the replies. There are many good and interesting points here.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

I'd forget about why he's there or what he says - much of it doesn't make any real sense - just put Karajan and the BPO on Act 3 and enjoy the glories of the orchestral score!


----------



## amfortas (Jun 15, 2011)

DavidA said:


> I'd forget about why he's there or what he says - much of it doesn't make any real sense - just put Karajan and the BPO on Act 3 and enjoy the glories of the orchestral score!


Yes, you can always just enjoy the music, which is indeed glorious! But given Wagner's method of continuously recurring, transforming, and combining leitmotives, you can't fully appreciate what he does musically without knowing how it relates to the drama.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Spectrum said:


> Thanks for the replies. There are many good and interesting points here.


You're welcome.

The _Ring_, like Wagner's other mature operas, can be approached on many levels, and doesn't always yield its meanings quickly. Quite often a dramatic element in one of his works is, on a deep level, saying something different from, and even opposite to, what it would appear to be saying on its face, or according to conventional wisdom. Wagner's artistic instincts were subtle and sharp, and his musical and dramatic choices were not casual or random. Never give up on him when his meaning is not obvious, or even - perhaps especially - when you think it is.


----------



## mamascarlatti (Sep 23, 2009)

amfortas said:


> Yes, you can always just enjoy the music, which is indeed glorious! But given Wagner's method of continuously recurring, transforming, and combining leitmotives, you can't fully appreciate what he does musically without knowing how it relates to the drama.


100% agree. My appreciation of the Ring increased immensely when I started recognising leitmotifs.


----------



## Ulrich (5 mo ago)

Woodduck said:


> I've always felt that the question scene with Mime is the least compelling scene in the _Ring_, dramatically and musically.


I don’t really agree with that. It’s true that the scene isn’t as dramatically intense as others in the Ring. But it still made an impression on me when I first heard it. 
We are made aware, that Wotan, who has been in a way the main character in Rheingold and Walküre, has resigned himself to a more passive role in the story. Also the Wanderer calls Wotan (himself) by the name „Licht-Alberich“ ,which suggests that Wotan and Alberich are not only similar characters but might actually be related. Maybe there is some other hint to this before. But me for this was the first scene that I noticed it. And finally it is revealed, that Mime is fully aware of Siegfried‘s true identity. This confirms, that Siegfried is right about distrusting Mime.


----------

