Utter Pandemonium: Devil-Narratives in the First Edition of the Grimms' Fairy Tales
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper examines how depictions of the devil in the first edition of the Grimm Brothers’ Folk and Fairy Tales function to mitigate the spiritual anxieties which arose from the decentralization of religious authority in post-Reformation Germany. It centres upon three tales: “The Devil and his Grandmother”, “the Devil with the Three Golden Hairs”, and “The Blacksmith and the Devil”. Beginning with a brief overview of the religious climate of post-Reformation Germany and the function of devil’s-pact narratives during the Medieval period, it proceeds to examine how the Grimm tales subvert the moralizing function of their Medieval precursors. It illustrates how the tales use absurd humour to humanize the devil, making him an object of mockery rather than terror. From there, it demonstrates that, in all three tales, the protagonists’ dealing with the devil does not place their souls in jeopardy, disrupting the orthodox potential of the devil-narrative by allowing the protagonists to attain earthly rewards without the supposedly requisite spiritual punishment. Moreover, it observes that almost every instance of reward without punishment is situated within a broader narrative of the protagonists’ securing social advancement despite an oppressive social structure. Having illustrated these features, it posits that the tales’ valourization of wit and resourcefulness over moral virtue serves to both reflect and manage the existential uncertainty of a society which had rejected church authority but not religion itself. It concludes by suggesting that these tales’ depictions of the human-devil relationship offer a fascinating addition to the Miltonic and Faustian traditions.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".