‘Das furchtbar-schöne Gorgonenhaupt des Klassischen’: Deutsche Antikenbilder (1755–1875) by Lorella Bosco (review)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
278 Reviews of certain key texts?Werther, forexample?will seem too brief to some readers. And it is a pity that the altogether justifiable emphasis on drama means that Goethe's Sturm und Drang lyrics are given only incidental coverage. This volume nevertheless contains some lively and engaging writing that incorporates the latest research and conveys some of the complexities of evaluating this highly influential corpus of liter? ary and critical work. University of Exeter Lesley Sharpe 'Das furchtbar-schoneGorgonenhaupt des Klassischen': Deutsche Antikenbilder {1755? 1875). By Lorella Bosco. Wiirzburg: Konigshausen & Neumann. 2004. 400 pp. ?49.50. ISBN 3-8260-2730-2. This very long book, originally a doctoral dissertation from the Freie Universitat Berlin, can best be described as a survey of the development of German Hellenism from Winckelmann to Nietzsche, with a focus on three particular areas. These are, first,the growing prominence, fromthe Romantics onwards, ofthe dark side of classi? cal antiquity, this story culminating in Nietzsche's concept of the Dionysian. Second, the author examines the development of classical education and the growing gulf between its normative and its scholarly {wissenschaftlich) aspirations, with sections devoted to such figures as Friedrich Creuzer and Karl Otfried Muller, and another to the reception of Die Geburt der Tragodieby Wilamowitz. Third, the book contains two chapters of conventional literary analysis, one of them dealing with Kleist, espe? cially his Penthesilea, the other with a selection of pertinent works by Heine, these authors being selected for their use of classical motifs in a manner sharply divergent from the Winckelmannian ideal. Despite containing a great deal of sound scholarship, the book makes forlaborious reading. This is partly a matter of content. There are several distinct topics here, but, instead of synthesizing them into a single story,Bosco has given us a somewhat random series of self-contained studies offiguresand readings of individual works. Frequently the reader senses that she is seeking not so much to reframe or reinterpret what is in essence a fairlyfamiliar story but rather, and merely, to cover a certain amount of territory.The discussions of Kleist and of Nietzsche, for example, have little to do with each other, causing this reader to wonder if they belong in the same book at all. The relative weight accorded to differentparts often seems arbitrary: why sixty pages on Kleist but only eleven on Holderlin? Similarly, Bosco prefaces her Heine chapter with a twelve-page outline of classical scholarship in the Biedermeier generation, but she fails to explain its relevance to Heine. Besides the content, however, the problem also concerns the book's scholarly ambition. Rarely if ever do the discussions break new ground; indeed, a large percentage of the book is composed of quotations from secondary sources, which are passed on without comment. Rarely if ever does Bosco seek to bring out differences of interpretation, preferring an exegetic mode of expo? sition. While much industry has undoubtedly gone into this volume, it is hard to see how it offersits readers anything that they could not have learnt from its sources. Queen's University, Canada David Pugh ...
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".