Translations of Selfhood in Ver Sacrum: Language and Modernity at the Viennese Fin De Siècle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Around the turn of the twentieth century, Vienna was blossoming into a tumultuous and buoyant central European hub. Despite political instabilities as part of Austria-Hungary, cultural, artistic and literary productions had come to an anthropocentric turn which marked the surfacing of die Moderne. An increasing (self-)awareness of one’s own psychology, perception and individuality led to radical (artistic and literary) expressions and the realization of social repressions. Viennese modernism launched a new aspect of language; one that would lead to visually and cognitively stimulating and disturbing works of art, literature, architecture, social activities and even medical practices. Ver Sacrum (1898-1903), an artistic and cultural magazine that aimed to be a Gesamtkunstwerk, a transdisciplinary, transmedial total work of art is an evidential reference point to the conceptualization of human selfhood and personhood. In an effort to understand Ver Sacrum beyond its role as the revolutionary and rebellious Kunstblatt of the Vienna Secession artists, the paper examines three entries from Ver Sacrum’s very first January 1898 edition: Max Burckhard’s article “Ver Sacrum,” as well as “Weshalb wir eine Zeitschrift herausgeben?” written by an unknown author¾presumably to collectively represent all members of the Vienna Secession¾and Hermann Bahr’s “Vereinigung Bildender Kunstler Osterreichs. Secession.” Ver Sacrum incorporates the need to express more of one’s inner (and artistic) perception and further exemplifies a persuasive kind of language, a way with words that portrays a requisite for acquiring (an artistic) selfhood. This requisite is Kunstsinn and Kunstempfindung. Although other cultural spheres such as coffeehouses, ball rooms, and the Ringstrasse also expressed and mirrored a new perception of the world and society, Ver Sacrum was an intentionally organized social and cultural sphere with an emphasis on the individual. The modern environment of this time was a product of das Ich-Empfindung. Ver Sacrum provided an orchestrated use of language commemorating works of art for an existential reason, thus, it was a necessary and primary tool for translating a modern artistic self into an even more comprehensible picture of reality for the Viennese and European society.
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) | 0.000 | 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".