MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2137762096 · doi:10.1353/smr.0.0065

Whimsy, Wit, and Humor : Satire in the Work of Matthias Claudius

2009· article· en· W2137762096 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Herbert Rowland

Bibliographic record

VenueSeminar A Journal of Germanic Studies · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicGerman Literature and Culture Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGermanArtLiteratureOrder (exchange)PoetryPhilosophyArt historyClassicsHistoryArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Whimsy, Wit, and Humor: Satire in the Work of Matthias Claudius Herbert Rowland Among the several images of Matthias Claudius that have become prevalent in German literary history are what Reinhard Görisch in 1981 called “der fromme und einfältige Claudius,” “der idyllische Claudius,” and “der erbauliche Claudius” (Görisch 29–43). These images relate to the popular understanding of the poet who wrote frequently anthologized poems such as “Abendlied” (“Der Mond ist aufgegangen”) and “Ein Wiegenlied bei Mondschein zu singen” (“So schlafe nun du Kleine!”) as well as a number of devotional writings in prose, that is, the deeply and unproblematically devout Christian who shunned the public theatre in favour of the private joys of provincial, familial life and who occasionally raised a forefinger to convey truths that are still valid today. Awareness of works such as “Kriegslied” (“’s ist Krieg! ‘s ist Krieg! O Gottes Engel wehre”), which was evoked as recently as by Günter Grass in connection with the impending war in Iraq, has on the whole added little nuance to the view of the man and his work in the public at large and, one suspects, even among most Germanists. Beginning in the early seventies with the work of Koch and Siebke and Kranefuss, a small but active group of specialists has substantially revised the traditional notion of Claudius. Yet dismay is in order at the tenacity of older images of the poet – as evident in the annotated bibliography that has appeared annually since 1992 in the Jahrbuch der Claudius-Gesellschaft. Despite a certain amount of progress these images persist in professional circles surely in part owing to the unfortunate circumstance that much of the best recent work devoted to Claudius has been published in theses, Festschriften, and conference volumes as well as certain periodicals of similarly limited reach. One can therefore scarcely overemphasize the fact that Claudius took part in the public discussion on a number of the key issues of his highly eventful, in part tumultuous time and that he entered the debate with satire in both verse and prose. Indeed, satire dominated his early work, remained prominent during the heyday of his career, and returned during his later years to play a significant role (see Rowland, Matthias Claudius: Language as “Infamous Funnel” 85–134). Claudius’s satire participates in all six of the subject categories of contemporary German satire identified by Günter Wellmanns: personal satire, literary satire, political and religious subjects, learned satire, moral satire, and satire of social class and profession (55–115). All but the last of these types are [End Page 111] represented by the texts scrutinized in this study, and certain works manifest more than one kind. As we shall see, Claudius’s satire also employs the epigram, fable, fictional letter, and many of the other satiric forms typical of the age (see Wellmanns 116–21; also Flögel). While uneven in quality, it is often far more successful than its relative obscurity would suggest. Writing from London in 1778, the (anonymous) German correspondent of the Deutsches Museum called Claudius “Deutschlands Yorick,” to which Wilhelm Röseler assented in his study of Claudius’s humor nearly a century later (Thayer 133). Though noteworthy for its hyperbole, the comparison to Sterne is not at all without merit, for Claudius’s satire not infrequently exhibits that spirit of genial madness that one associates with the Englishman. Claudius certainly knew Tristram Shandy, for he reviewed the novel in the translation of Johann Joachim Bode, the publisher of Der Wandsbecker Bote and thus his superior (Sämtliche Werke 874), and he probably read A Sentimental Journey as well, which Bode also translated. I know of no evidence to suggest that he had more than a casual acquaintance with Swift; the Sir John Bickerstaf of the Hamburgische Adreβ-Comtoir-Nachrichten, which he edited from 1768–1770, is probably indebted to Swift’s Squire Isaac Bickerstaff only in his reincarnation in Addison’s and Steele’s The Tatler (Sämtliche Werke 1043, note to p. 734). While most of Claudius’s satire is more Sternesque in tenor – generally speaking of the urbane and sanguine Horatian kind – a significant portion of it nonetheless...

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.313
Threshold uncertainty score0.366

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.243 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSeminar A Journal of Germanic StudiesSame topicGerman Literature and Culture StudiesFrench-language works237,207