Throughout Wieland's text, the text revolves around the possibility of social, and therefore national, progress in the period following the American Revolution. The possible answers that the text might provide are ambiguous and certainly beyond the scope of this essay. However, one specific passage that contributes significantly to this textual discussion is contained in Clara's description of the qualities of her brother and father and the acquisition of the bust of Cicero and how this sets the tone for the children's use of their father's temple. While attempting to break with established systems of thought, the Wieland clan adheres to Enlightenment thinking and, with it, respect for classical civilizations. In doing so, the possibility of progress is replaced by regression, as they simply simulate and perform what they conceive to be Roman culture. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why violent video games should not be banned”?Get the original essayThe similarities between Wieland and his father form the basis on which the rejection of certain values ​​begins. They retain similar characters and appearances and “…were accustomed to [seeing]…the vicissitudes of human life…” (Brown 22) from the same perspective. Consistently considering constantly changing circumstances seems paradoxical and lends itself to the idea of ​​society as fundamentally unalterable. The choice of the word “vicissitudes” is remarkable because it comes from a Latin root originally meaning “turn by turn”. Given the context of this passage, we can parallel this imagery of the turn towards revolution, a reversal, originally meaning a return to the past. Such a connection would suggest that both Wieland men would view revolution as an ineffective means of achieving societal progress. These analogous traits are, however, neither the most remarkable nor the most influential during this passage. The key differences between Wieland's men belie their similarities and reveal the underlying ideological divides that cause children to attempt to abandon their father's path. . Compared to his father, Wieland's mind is "...enriched by science..." (Brown 22). The Enlightenment's valorization of rationality is here anchored in the text and thus elevates scientific knowledge above other forms. At the heart of this valuation and the scientific method is the assumption that through trial and error, improvements can be made and the truth can be established. Clara also describes her brother's mind as having been "...decorated with literature" (Brown 22). This statement frames the mind in aesthetic terms and targets literature in an almost pejorative way. The function of literature now is to add detail and make it more interesting, but not necessarily to improve. Such a position is contrary to that of the elder Wieland, especially considering his religious conversion and pilgrimage, which were entirely motivated by the text (Brown 8). These ideological assumptions underpin Wieland's children's efforts to break free from old paradigms and venture into new ones. Their attempt first reveals itself in a revolutionary way in the appropriation of a sacred space for secular purposes. With apparent disregard for the place of their father's death, his "...temple was no longer put to its former use" (Brown 22). Consistent with her brother's rational thinking, Clara asserts that religious spaces can be designated as non-religious spaces. If we consider the father figure of the Church, all the more present because of the religious practices of the elder Wieland, theThe term “old” is indicative of revolutionary goals in the perception of the previous generation as instantly outdated. The children push to repurpose the temple for their own "new" space and leave behind the remnants of the past, but fail and simply replace one past with another. For decoration of the temple and in commemoration of one of Wieland's children's idols, Wieland “…purchased a bust of Cicero” (Brown 22). At first glance, this does not seem entirely counter-revolutionary or anti-progressive, but if one views the post-revolutionary period as ideally one of original cultural production, then such a purchase seems contradictory. Although such a setting is consistent with the need to glorify historical figures, particularly those from ancient democratic societies, from the Age of Enlightenment. This element of hero worship can be seen as a simple return to the principles of the past, although it may be a different past, and therefore contrary to revolutionary progress. This vein of replication, rather than innovation, is further detailed in the history of the sculptor and his work. The artist is “…an Italian adventurer…” (Brown 22) who is therefore historically and culturally linked to ancient Roman civilization. Thus, it pursues and diffuses this cultural linearity. Additionally, “he claimed to have copied this piece from an antique…” (Brown 22). Since a bust is already a copy of a person, the bust Wieland purchased is a copy of a copy. This twice copied image/object is now the one that Wieland himself seeks to emulate in his attachment to the writings of Cicero. The reproducibility of history and culture threatens the nature of Clara and Wieland's efforts to use the freedom and space they have to form something other than what existed before. Added to the complexity of the situation in which Wieland's children find themselves is the impossibility of distinguishing the original from the replica. They are “not qualified to judge…the veracity of [the sculptor’s] claims…” (Brown 22). Their situation immediately contradicts a rationality based on sensory experience because they are convinced only by its “marble…pure and polished…” (Brown 22). While visual aesthetics are certainly reason enough to appreciate art, they are not enough (normally, or in this case) to discover the origins of a work of art. The artist could very well have copied an ancient bust, but he could just as easily have copied a modern copy of an ancient bust. There's no way to know, and it doesn't really matter. In this case, all the copies lead back to Cicero, in one way or another. It is this reproducibility of image and action that creates the enigma in Mettingen and undermines the possibility of original cultural production or progress. It is the reproducibility of thought, ideology and action through performance that ultimately destabilizes the push for change and social progress. The Wielands accept the bust because they are “…pleased to admire [the sculptor’s]…performance” (Brown 22). Just as the bust could be the replica of a replica, its performance could be the performance of a truth, and therefore of what we usually consider a lie. When one begins to untangle things through simulation and performance, the dichotomies between truth and lie, original and copy begin to dissolve into each other. And this is precisely what happens when Wieland commissions “…the same artist to carve a suitable pedestal from a nearby quarry” (Brown 22). This base probably corresponds to the bust, but it is made locally. The geological origin of the bust is therefore called into question.