THE FREEDOM OF A PLAYWRIGHT: STURM UND DRANG AESTHETIC INNOVATION THROUGH A LUTHERAN LENS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT This article builds on a passage from Johann Georg Hamann's Fünf Hirtenbriefe das Schuldrama betreffend (1763) to argue that the discourse on the rules of dramatic composition in the Sturm und Drang is shaped by an implicitly Lutheran logic of Christian freedom. That means that rather than emphasising the transgression of established rules, Sturm und Drang writers, like Luther's free Christian, sought to replace obedience to lower‐level laws with submission to a higher principle. This Lutheran reframing of the Sturm und Drang revises the conventional understanding of the Sturm und Drang writers as literary revolutionaries and brings their aesthetic programme much more closely in line with their moderate political views. Moreover, in stressing the Lutheran underpinnings of Sturm und Drang aesthetics, this article also calls into question the established view that the theological aspects of Hamann's aesthetics are without parallel in the Sturm und Drang proper. At the centre of the Lutheran reinterpretation of the Sturm und Drang in this article stand analyses of J. M. R. Lenz's Anmerkungen übers Theater, Johann Gottfried Herder's ‘Shakespear’ and Johann Wolfgang Goethe's ‘Zum Schäkespears Tag’ and Götz von Berlichingen.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.037 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".