The Sublime as a Response to Terror: A Study of Empiricism and Transcendence in Gustavo Adolfo Bécquer’s “El monte de las ánimas”
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper studies the relationship between 18th century Enlightenment philosophy and 19th century Romantic expression by relating the Burkean and Kantian conceptualizations of the sublime to Gustavo Adolfo Bécquer’s leyenda, “El monte de las ánimas.” Although Burke opts for an empirical approach while Kant takes a transcendental approach, both theories highlight the contradictory philosophical platform of the Enlightenment: individual>society. The shift in focus from the social to the individual is evidenced in 19th century literary production through Bécquer’s treatment of the relationship between the subject and the empirical and metaphysical worlds. In this paper, this relationship is studied through the representations of objects and sounds that are all used to inspire one sensation: terror. These representations convey the menacing aspects of nature, break the boundaries of time and space, and juxtapose reality and unreality. In this way, the analysis suggests that the narrative and descriptive techniques used to represent the terror experienced by the characters aim to inspire a similar effect on the reader, while also indicating that the philosophy of the Enlightenment provides the theoretical underpinnings for Romantic expression in the 19th century.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.035 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".