Abstract
Vitality is a main aspect of literature since the 18th century. The new conception of literature as art, that was developed around 1770, also changed the notion of the poet, who act as a ‘second maker’ and creates works of art as an effigy of himself. Not all and even some of the most famous authors between 1750 and 1850 fit this very influential depiction. The paper presents reasons for that in the historical context and explores some of the consequences. It lays out the frictions between the notion of autonomous production and the actual limitations imposed on it by the bodies that have to execute it.
Über den Autor: Daniel Ehrmann, Universität Wien
Editorial review
Rechte: CC-BY 4.0
Empfohlene Zitierweise: Daniel Ehrmann: „Buckel, Blutsturz und das tägliche Befinden. Widerständige Körperlichkeit im Zeitalter der Autonomie (Lichtenberg, Schiller, Stifter)“, in: Kunst und Gebrechen, hg. v. Hildegard Fraueneder, Manfred Kern und Nora Grundtner, Wien: Sonderzahl 2024 (Figurationen des Übergangs 1), S. 41-73, DOI: 10.25598/transitionen-2024-i_3, <https://transition.hypotheses.org/4696>