Magic and Enlightenment auf der Wiesen: Der Stein der Weisen and Die Zauberflöte
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper probes how the rational and the irrational interact in Enlightenment operatic plots, and explores the effect of this interaction on the Viennese public. To do this, I will investigate the fantastic worlds of two operas premiered by the same opera company, both with libretti written by Emanuel Schikaneder:Der Stein der Weisenoder Die Zauberinsel (1790)and Die Zauberflöte (1791). David J. Buch’s seminal book Magic Flutes and Enchanted Forests (2008) explores the intertextual threads of magical ideas in Der Stein der Weisen and Die Zauberflöte, that is, how librettists and composers translated and reprocessed magical themes. I will draw on Buch’s comparison to show how these intertextual connections can be read for their broad cultural resonances. In this paper, I will first establish the connections between Der Stein der Weisen and Die Zauberflötein plot and in music.Then I will show how the later operadiverges from its predecessor and discuss how it manages to diminish the polarity of rationality and irrationality considered central to Enlightenment thinking. Ultimately, I argue, Die Zauberflötefacilitates its audience’s access to Enlightenment values by magical means.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".