Skip to Main Content
Have library access? Log in through your library
Who Is This Schiller Now?

Who Is This Schiller Now?: Essays on His Reception and Significance

Jeffrey L. High
Nicholas Martin
Norbert Oellers
Volume: 99
Copyright Date: 2011
Published by: Boydell and Brewer,
Pages: 512
https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.7722/j.ctt81zk8
  • Cite this Item
  • Book Info
    Who Is This Schiller Now?
    Book Description:

    The works of Friedrich Schiller (1759-1805) - an innovative and resonant tragedian and an important poet, essayist, historian, and aesthetic theorist - are among the best known of German and world literature. Schiller's explosive original artistry and feel for timely and enduring personal tragedy embedded in timeless sociohistorical conflicts remain the topic of lively academic debate. The essays in this volume address the many flashpoints and canonical shifts in the cyclically polarized reception of Schiller and his works, in pursuit of historical and contemporary answers to Samuel Taylor Coleridge's expression of frightened admiration in 1794: "Who is this Schiller?" The responses demonstrate pronounced shifts from widespread twentieth-century understandings of Schiller: the overwhelming emphasis here is on Schiller the cosmopolitan realist, and little or no trace is left of the ultimately untenable view of Schiller as an abstract idealist who turned his back on politics. Ehrhard Bahr, Matthew Bell, Frederick Burwick, Jennifer Driscoll Colosimo, Bernd Fischer, Gail K. Hart, Fritz Heuer, Hans H. Hiebel, Jeffrey L. High, Walter Hinderer, Paul E. Kerry, Erik B. Knoedler, Elisabeth Krimmer, Maria del Rosario Acosta López, Laura Anna Macor, Dennis F. Mahoney, Nicholas Martin, John A. McCarthy, Yvonne Nilges, Norbert Oellers, Peter Pabisch, David Pugh, T. J. Reed, Wolfgang Riedel, Jörg Robert, Ritchie Robertson, Jeffrey L. Sammons, Henrik Sponsel. Jeffrey L. High is Associate Professor of German Studies at California State University Long Beach, Nicholas Martin is Reader in European Intellectual History at the University of Birmingham, and Norbert Oellers is Professor Emeritus of German Literature at the University of Bonn.

    eISBN: 978-1-57113-765-4
    Subjects: Language & Literature

Table of Contents

Export Selected Citations Export to NoodleTools Export to RefWorks Export to EasyBib Export a RIS file (For EndNote, ProCite, Reference Manager, Zotero, Mendeley...) Export a Text file (For BibTex)
  1. Front Matter
    (pp. i-vi)
  2. Table of Contents
    (pp. vii-x)
  3. Foreword
    (pp. xi-xiv)
    Jeffrey L. High, Nicholas Martin and Norbert Oellers

    Who is this Schiller? Who has he been? Who is this Schiller now? When is this Schiller? Whose Schiller is this? What is Schiller? A dramatist, a poet, a historian, an aesthetician, a philosopher, an essayist, a political theorist? The 2009 Long Beach Schiller Conference sought contemporary answers to the question already posed in 1794 by Samuel Taylor Coleridge, the translator of Wallenstein (1800), and to the many questions and responses that followed and still linger. The revised lectures presented here address Coleridge’s question both indirectly and directly. The responses demonstrate several trends that indicate pronounced shifts from widespread twentieth-century...

  4. Acknowledgments
    (pp. xv-xvi)
  5. List of Abbreviations
    (pp. xvii-xviii)
  6. Introduction: Why Is This Schiller [Still] in the United States?
    (pp. 1-22)
    Jeffrey L. High

    The international Schiller conference, “Who is this Schiller [now]?” took place from Thursday 10 September through Saturday 12 September 2009 in the The Karl Anatol Center for Faculty Development at California State University Long Beach (CSULB). This volume comprises the revised and expanded papers of what was an unusually lively and productive conference on the occasion of the 250th anniversary of Friedrich Schiller’s birth in 1759. The conference featured thirty-one papers in the course of three days. The average paper drew an audience of over eighty listeners, from a high of more than 120 listeners for a paper delivered in...

  7. Part I: Schiller, Drama, and Poetry

    • 1: Lenz und Schiller. Die erlebnissymptomatische Dramensprache
      (pp. 25-36)
      Hans H. Hiebel

      Vorab meine These: Schillers Soziolekt in Kabale und Liebe wäre ohne die revolutionäre Dramaturgie von Jakob Michael Reinhold Lenz — Mimesis von gesprochener Sprache, Körpersymptomen und Gestik — nicht denkbar gewesen.

      Parallel zu Die Soldaten von J. M. R. Lenz erscheint 1776 Die Kindermörderin von Heinrich Leopold Wagner. Eine verunglückende Zweierbeziehung — wie im Urfaust — ist die Basis beider Stücke. Das „Bürgerliche Trauerspiel“ zeichnet sich durch eine solche Beziehung aus, meist wird jedoch die Zweierbeziehung durch einen Dritten in zur Katastrophe führender Weise gestört. In Lenzens Soldaten ist Marie Wesener dem Tuchhändler Stolzius versprochen, wird aber vom adeligen Offizier...

    • 2: Melancholy in Schiller’s Dramas
      (pp. 37-54)
      Matthew Bell

      The tradition of melancholy in the literary and visual arts is one of the longest and most diverse in Western culture. It has been a continuous presence since Hippocrates in the fourth century BCE and has enjoyed periodic artistic flowerings, for instance in the Italian Renaissance, Elizabethan and Jacobean England, and the late eighteenth century in Germany. As for diversity, the tradition of melancholy has taken many different forms: medical theories of melancholia; characterology of the melancholy temperament; astrological and neo-Platonic theories of Saturnian melancholy; religious melancholy, for instance in Puritan and Pietist devotional literature and conversion narratives, or the...

    • 3: Schillers Ästhetik der Trauer. Der Dichter als “elegischer” Lyriker und Dramatiker
      (pp. 55-68)
      Ehrhard Bahr

      Wer ist dieser Schiller heute? Konfrontiert mit der Coleridge-Frage dieser Konferenz, überprüft man als Beiträger die Titel, die man ihm zugedacht hat: Schiller als Dichter des Idealismus, als Vertreter der Weimarer Klassiker, als wichtigster deutscher Nationaldramatiker neben Brecht, als Vermittler zwischen Kant und Hegel auf dem Gebiet der Ästhetik, als Theoretiker der modernen Literatur. Meine Antwort lautet: Schiller als Dichter der Trauer — nicht ausschließlich, denn man wird der Utopie einen Raum in seinem Denken und Dichten einräumen müssen —, aber doch der Dichter des Elegischen, wie er es in seinem Aufsatz Ueber naive und sentimentalische Dichtung definierte. Wer sich...

    • 4: Glühendes Wort zum Ideal über der versagenden Realität — zu Schillers Balladen
      (pp. 69-80)
      Peter Pabisch

      Die etwas übertrieben wirkende Formulierung des Themas will auf eine durchgängige Auffassung der theoretischen Kritik von Schillers Epik der Balladen bauen, die das sprachliche Kunstwerk dieses besonders in den siebziger und achtziger Jahren des 20. Jahrhunderts im allgemeinen Schulunterricht vernachlässigten Dichters wieder in den Vordergrund der Lehre rückt. Schillers fesselnder Prosastil etwa in den historischen Schriften, sein packender Dialog in den Dramen von seinen Frühwerken des Sturm und Drangs zu den im Jahre 2009 wieder erfolgreich aufgeführten historischen Dramen — etwa Maria Stuart (1800) in New York und London — und 2010 wieder in Berlin, bis hin zu seinem idealistischen...

    • 5: Zwischen Max Piccolomini und Buttler. Wallensteins Orts- und Zeitverluste
      (pp. 81-96)
      Norbert Oellers

      Schiller heute? Wallenstein heute? Es lässt sich darauf antworten: Der Dichter und sein Werk sind, was sie geworden sind, vor über 200 Jahren; sie sind als das einst Gewordene dauerhaft. Aber es lässt sich auch sagen: Kunstwerke sind nie das dauerhaft Abgeschlossene. Also bedürfen sie immer wieder der Beschreibung, Analyse und Interpretation, um ihre Bedeutung für die jeweilige Gegenwart zu bestimmen. Wer sich mit Schiller beschäftigt, tut es in der Regel nicht, weil er den Dichter für antiquiert, für vorgestrig hält, sondern weil er für gewiss annimmt, dass er lebendig geblieben ist. Und wenn in der Gegenwart wiederholt wird, was...

  8. Part II: Schiller, Aesthetics, and Philosophy

    • 6: Die Moralphilosophie des jungen Schiller. Ein ‚Kantianer ante litteram‘
      (pp. 99-115)
      Laura Anna Macor

      War Friedrich Schiller ein Kantianer? Diese Frage hat die philosophische Rezeption von Schillers Werk von Anfang an gekennzeichnet und ist noch heutzutage alles andere als unumstritten. Man ist dabei bedenkenlos von der Annahme ausgegangen, nur die zu Schillers sogenannter philosophischer Phase gehörenden Schriften seien zur Beantwortung dieser Frage heranzuziehen und genügten zum korrekten Verständnis von Schillers Verhältnis zu Kant. Erst in den letzten Jahrzehnten sind wichtige Beiträge zur philosophischen Entwicklung des jungen Schiller¹ und zur Tiefe von Schillers Kant-Kritik² geliefert worden, die eine neue Epoche in der Schiller-Forschung versprechen. Wesentlicher Bestandteil dieser neuen Perspektive ist die Berücksichtigung von Schillers jugendlichen...

    • 7: Aesthetic Humanism and Its Foes: The Perspective from Halle
      (pp. 116-132)
      David Pugh

      What actually is aesthetics, what is its significance, and why did it crop up when it did? These are questions worth asking before we try to assess Schiller’s contribution to this discipline, although in working through his aesthetic writings, readers are generally so taxed by the task of following the twists of the argument that they can be forgiven if they lose sight of this larger context. We are often told that the great accomplishment of Kant and Schiller and their precursors in the German Enlightenment is to have delineated aesthetic experience, that is, our capacity for disinterested enjoyment of...

    • 8: Zur kulturpolitischen Dynamik des ästhetischen Spiels in Schillers Briefen Ueber die ästhetische Erziehung des Menschen
      (pp. 133-146)
      Bernd Fischer

      Auf der Suche nach Schillers Aktualität spreche ich in diesem Beitrag Aspekte seiner ästhetischen Theorie an, die vor dem Hintergrund heutiger Überlegungen (insbesondere von Odo Marquard) zur gesellschaftlichen Funktionalität ästhetischer Kompensation und Therapie als Antizipationen einer kulturpolitisch relevanten Ästhetik aufscheinen. Dieser Brückenschlag von Schiller zu Marquard, den dieser zwar in Bezug auf Schillers Geschichtsphilosophie, nicht aber in Bezug auf seine Ästhetik selbst durchdacht hat,¹ scheint mir nicht zuletzt darum aktuell, weil er eine alternative und zugleich komplementäre Sicht zu Peter Sloterdijks Philosophie der spirituellen Immunisierung bietet, in der die literarische Ästhetik hauptsächlich als metaphorischer Stichwortgeber eingespannt wird.² Als Sonderabteilung des...

    • 9: Die Empfänglichkeit für den ästhetischen Schein ist das a priori des Schönen in Kants Kritik der Urteilskraft. Das Orientierende in Schillers Forderung der ästhetischen Erziehung des Menschen
      (pp. 147-164)
      Fritz Heuer

      Gedenkjahre ehren mit Festakten des Erinnerns in Erbstücke verwandelt, was einst Ereignis im Aufreißen von Spielraum neuen Beginnens sein konnte. Wo Hinterlassenschaften wie begonnene Revolutionen mit deren Stiftern den Erben zu einer unbequemen Last geworden sein mögen,¹ lässt sich die Bürde gleichwohl unvermerkt festlich entsorgen, wenn Bedürfnisse späterer Zeiten für sich aufsammeln, was jeweils zu willkommener, aber aus anderen Interessen gelenkter Selbstbestätigung taugt. Je weiter sich Gedenkjahre von vormals Ereignishaftem entfernen, kann auch solcher Wandel der Aufmerksamkeit selbst die Arbeit des Erinnerns unterhalten, während sich ursprüngliche Orientierungen verschieben oder verloren gehen. Und so möchten wir zu Schillers 250. Geburtstag über...

    • 10: Energy and Schiller’s Aesthetics from the “Philosophical” to the Aesthetic Letters
      (pp. 165-186)
      John A. McCarthy

      In their long and frequent conversations about science, politics, aesthetics, and philosophy, an enduring question for Schiller and Goethe, and one that transcended all branches of knowledge, was the nature of energy; it lurks behind their view of nature as all-encompassing.² There are clear traces of this outreach in Goethe’s Faust (1808) and in Schiller’s Wallenstein (1798–99). In Goethean terms, which are better-known than Schiller’s thinking on the subject, the notion of energy is perhaps best encapsulated in the term Steigerung, which is usually translated as heightening, deepening, or intensification. Each variation has one element in common: Kraft (energy,...

    • 11: “Making Other People’s Feelings Our Own”: From the Aesthetic to the Political in Schiller’s Aesthetic Letters
      (pp. 187-202)
      María del Rosario Acosta López

      Reading Schiller in the twenty-first century cannot be the same as reading Schiller at any other time. As obvious as this may sound to any reader informed by the hermeneutical tradition, in the case of Schiller this is a statement that has to be considered carefully and seriously. Those who read Schiller today — and not just read him, but make an attempt to understand his political thinking and his theories about our aesthetic being in the world — run the risk of appearing to be naive, optimistic, non-critical, and therefore very dangerous, thinkers. When rereading Schiller today, one has...

  9. Part III: Schiller, History, and Politics

    • 12: Schiller und die Demokratie
      (pp. 205-216)
      Yvonne Nilges

      In der universalhistorischen Vorlesung „Die Gesetzgebung des Lykurgus und Solon“ (1789) entwirft Schiller unter Rückgriff auf Locke und Montesquieu sein verfassungsrechtliches Ideal: die repräsentative Demokratie. Das Adjektivum — „demokratisch“ — ist in Schillers Œuvre nur durch eine einzige Textstelle belegt. Beachtenswert ist dabei: im Fiesko (1783), dass die unmittelbare, direkte Demokratie mitsamt ihrer Gefährdungen zur Anschauung gelangt. Dies geschieht in der Fabel des Tierstaats, die Fiesko im zweiten Aufzug rhetorisch subversiv den suggestiblen Bürgern auseinanderlegt:

      FIESKO der sich niedersezt. Genuese — Das Reich der Thiere kam einst in bürgerliche Gährung, Partheyen schlugen mit Partheyen [. . .]. Izt ward ein...

    • 13: God’s Warriors, Mercenaries, or Freedom Fighters? Politics, Warfare, and Religion in Schiller’s Geschichte des Dreyßigjährigen Kriegs
      (pp. 217-235)
      Elisabeth Krimmer

      In recent years scholars of war, such as Herfried Münkler, have drawn attention to the similarities between the Thirty Years’ War and the wars of the late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries.¹ As Münkler points out, both the Thirty Years’ War and today’s “war on terror” are long-lasting conflicts of varying intensity in which the importance of the “Entscheidungsschlacht” (decisive military encounter) recedes into the background. These wars do not produce quick victories but seek to exhaust the opponent and raise the cost of imposing one’s political will; both the Thirty Years’ War and the war on terror tend to...

    • 14: Who Is This Black Knight? Schiller’s Maid of Orleans and (Mythological) History
      (pp. 236-246)
      Erik B. Knoedler

      In Die Jungfrau von Orleans: Eine Romantische Tragödie (The Maid of Orleans: A Romantic Tragedy, 1801), Schiller transforms the ostensible “history” of the martyred teenager’s mythological mission into a work that embraces the philosophy of the Enlightenment. Specifically, Schiller’s version replaces the divine mission of Joan of Arc with the philosophical ideas of human secularism and both individual and political autonomy. As late-eighteenth-century German literature and art moved from the Enlightenment’s more rigid pursuit of verisimilitude toward the ambiguous symbolism of Romanticism, Die Jungfrau von Orleans, written before Early Romantic theory had resulted in any significant Early Romantic works, demonstrates...

    • 15: Religion and Violence in Schiller’s Late Tragedies
      (pp. 247-270)
      Wolfgang Riedel

      As expected, much was said at the Schiller symposiums in the double anniversary years of 2005/2009 about the poet of freedom, hope, courage, and revolts, in a word, about Schiller the idealist. However, it has recently become more widely known that Schiller was also very much a realist, not only as a poet but also as a thinker.¹ He was already a realist as a young man, a trained physician, anthropologist, and psychologist² who was keenly familiar with the mechanisms of human behavior, and particularly with its emotional and impulsive nature. As such, he was never subject to overly grand...

    • 16: So Who Was Naive? Schiller as Enlightenment Historian and His Successors
      (pp. 271-284)
      T. J. Reed

      Who is this Schiller now, Schiller the historian and thinker about history; and who has he been for some time? In a word, nobody. The collection of essays Deutsche Historiker edited by Hans-Ulrich Wehler, five volumes in the early 1970s, another batch of four in the early 1980s, has nothing on Schiller. At seven names per volume, a total of sixty-three favoured historians: might Schiller have squeezed in at number sixty-four? It looks unlikely. This in a collection that stretches all the way back to his predecessors and contemporaries, Pufendorf, Möser, Schlözer, and Spittler, and whose foreword declares that a...

  10. Part IV: Schiller Reception ─ Reception and Schiller

    • 17: Schiller and the Gothic — Reception and Reality
      (pp. 287-301)
      Jennifer Driscoll Colosimo

      Schiller’s relationship to Gothic Literature is as much a matter of perspective as it is of literary history. In Gothic Studies, a putatively international field that remains nonetheless dominated by English letters, Schiller’s status as an influential Gothic writer has long been established. After the ubiquitous E. T. A. Hoffmann, he is the most widely cited German author in reference and companion volumes to the Gothic. In Germanist scholarship, on the other hand, contributions made to the Gothic canon have never been ranked very highly — or even at all — among Schiller’s accomplishments. Rather, the traditional party line has...

    • 18: Schiller’s Plays on the British Stage, 1797–1825
      (pp. 302-320)
      Frederick Burwick

      Samuel Taylor Coleridge’s translation of Friedrich Schiller’s The Piccolomini was published in London by Longman in April or May 1800, followed by, and bound together with, The Death of Wallenstein in June 1800.¹ Extracts from Joseph Charles Mellish’s translation of Schiller’s Mary Stuart appeared in The German Museum in 1800, and Mellish’s complete translation was published by Cotta in London in 1801.² As important landmarks in the British reception of Schiller, these two translations are all the more significant because both predate the publication of the original works in Germany. Because reception was affected by the revolution in France, and...

    • 19: From Martyr to Vampire: The Figure of Mary Stuart in Drama from Vondel to Swinburne
      (pp. 321-339)
      Ritchie Robertson

      In this modified exercise in thematics, or as Germans call it “Stoffund Motivgeschichte,” I hope to avoid at least one of the faults that have brought such an approach into some disrepute. That is, treating all literary works that deal with the same material as equal in value, so that acknowledged masterpieces and ephemeral productions are treated as equivalent and the latter are resurrected for no apparent purpose other than thoroughness.¹ Instead, by looking at a selection of plays about Mary Stuart before and after Schiller, I hope to show that Schiller’s Maria Stuart (Mary Stuart, 1800) incorporates an exceptionally...

    • 20: A Chapter of Schiller in America: The First World War and Volume 3 of Kuno Francke’s Edition of The German Classics
      (pp. 340-350)
      Jeffrey L. Sammons

      The German Classics: Masterpieces of German Literature Translated into English, in twenty volumes with the Imperial eagle embossed in gold on each cover and nearly five hundred illustrations, mostly of German art of the nineteenth century, and some fifty scholarly contributors, including but not restricted to most of the prestigious American Germanists of the time, was publicized with a good deal of fanfare.¹ An advertisement that appeared in the New York Times on 12 March 1914 and several times thereafter associated the publication, somewhat misleadingly with a banquet at the Plaza on 9 May 1913, held in the interest of...

    • 21: The Reluctant Recruit? Schiller in the Trenches, 1914–1918
      (pp. 351-366)
      Nicholas Martin

      When he was Director of the Defense Studies Program at Harvard in the 1960s, Henry Kissinger is said to have remarked that “academic politics are so vicious precisely because the stakes are so low.”¹ Academics are, of course, no less capable of viciousness when the political stakes are high; and rarely, in Britain and Germany at least, have the stakes been higher than they were in 1914. The outbreak of the First World War saw the academic and cultural communities of two civilized nations turn on each other in an unprecedented spirit of mutual hostility. These communities, which had cooperated...

    • 22: Schiller — Kommerell — George. Eine Konstellation der Moderne
      (pp. 367-382)
      Jörg Robert

      Als der Frankfurter Privatdozent Max Kommerell im November 1934 in Bonn¹ anlässlich der Feiern zu Schillers 175. Geburtstag eine Festrede, „Schiller als Gestalter des Handelnden Menschen“,² zu halten hat, setzt auch er mit der Frage nach Schillers Aktualität ein: „Vielleicht hat sich Schiller die Frage: ‚Wer bin ich?‘ nie gestellt, nicht weil er ihr auswich, sondern weil sie ihn nicht bekümmerte: Eher die andere: ‚Was soll ich sein?‘ und die noch dringendere: ‚Was soll ich tun?‘“ (GB, 132). Für Kommerell ist Schillers „Wirkung unter den Deutschen [. . .]“ nicht nur Effekt der Rezeption, ‚Wirkung‘ ist geradezu integraler Bestandteil des...

    • 23: Was sagte dieser Schiller (damals)? Schillers Antworten auf seine Kritiker nach 1945
      (pp. 383-400)
      Henrik Sponsel

      Friedrich Schiller — unkritischer Spätaufklärer, blinder Idealist und gefährlicher Ästhetiker. Theodor W. Adorno, Max Horkheimer, Paul de Man und Terry Eagleton ankern ihre Kritik am Klassiker¹ Schiller in der zweiten Hälfte des 20. Jahrhunderts an diese stereotype Negativetikettierung. Adornos und Horkeimers Vorwürfe können allgemein aus ihrem Verständnis der Aufklärung selbst abgeleitet werden, wie es in Dialektik der Aufklärung (1947) beschrieben wird. So beginnt das erste Kapitel wie folgt: „Seit je hat Aufklärung im umfassendsten Sinn fortschreitenden Denkens das Ziel verfolgt, von den Menschen die Furcht zu nehmen und sie als Herren einzusetzen. Aber die vollends aufgeklärte Erde strahlt im Zeichen...

  11. Part V: Schiller Now

    • 24: Maria Stuart Adaptations in the Twentieth and Twenty-First Centuries: From “Classical” Parodies to Contemporary Politics
      (pp. 403-424)
      Dennis F. Mahoney

      For purposes of addressing the question “Who is this Schiller [now]?” this study will focus on Phyllida Lloyd’s 2009 staging of Mary Stuart on Broadway — but in the context of three twentieth-century parodies of aspects of Schiller’s play. Parodies occur when a text has become so (seemingly) well-known that individual lines or scenes begin to take on a life of their own, independent of their original context.¹ In his recent collection of aphorisms, slogans, cartoons, and headlines derived from Schiller quotations, Wolfgang Mieder provides ample proof of how “a too often cited stock phrase develops a natural dynamic toward...

    • 25: Whose Schiller Is This? Das Fremde und das Eigene in US Auslandsgermanistik
      (pp. 425-437)
      Gail K. Hart

      “Doch möchte ich diese Amerikanisierung und Verballhornung Schillers meinen Studenten nicht zumuten.”¹ Thus spake an eminent scholar at the conclusion of a review of Stephanie Hammer’s monograph Schiller’s Wound. Hammer’s work is psychoanalytically informed and prone, like the unconscious, to placing its objects in unaccustomed contexts — especially pop-cultural ones. The descent into popular culture constitutes part of the charge of Americanizing in this case, but only part. Additionally, the reviewer was disturbed by Hammer’s efforts to embed Schiller in the web of contemporary concerns (Aktualisierung) and by the perceived brevity of her engagement with the philological background. I will...

    • 26: Schiller’s Political Ideas: Who Cares?
      (pp. 438-450)
      Paul E. Kerry

      In a 2007 lecture at Yale University the philosopher Frederick Beiser declared that “the study of Schiller’s philosophy is not only in abrupt decline; it is virtually dead.”¹ This literary obituary weighed heavily, as did George Steiner’s prognosis that Schiller might in the next few decades become irrelevant to Western civilization, as the “three pillars on which the dynamic of Schiller’s ongoing presence rests,” namely, “Classicism, education, language” appear to be disappearing as intellectual values.² Does anyone care about Schiller’s political ideas? Are they understood to be a part of the current of eighteenth-century transatlantic European thought? How does one...

    • 27: Where Is This Schiller Now?
      (pp. 451-466)
      Walter Hinderer

      We had been led to believe that the skeletal remains of the two most influential German writers lie side by side in Weimar; Goethe the erstwhile attorney from Frankfurt on the Main, the ennobled author, and genuine privy council, who eventually became Minister of State and Excellency; and Schiller, the erstwhile physician from Stuttgart, Associate Professor of Philosophy, Court Council, and finally likewise ennobled author. The coffins rest slightly elevated, each adorned with bay wreaths befitting the revered Dioscuri, and practically identical in form and color; Schiller on the right, Goethe on the left, the arrangement not indicative of deeper...

  12. Notes on the Contributors
    (pp. 467-472)
  13. Index
    (pp. 473-494)
  14. Back Matter
    (pp. 495-495)