No wonder at least one critical intellectual, Swiss as it happens, but no doubt speaking for many others, fantasized about a “Schiller without Wilhelm Tell.” 1 Schiller himself had hoped that Tell would appeal to the “heart and senses” and be “effective on stage,” in other words, that it would be a folk play appealing to everybody (“Volksstück,” “für das ganze Publikum”). 4 Gonthier-Louis Fink, “Schillers Wilhelm Tell, ein antijakobinisches republikanisches Schauspiel,” (.)ġ Wilhelm Tell (1804) – unique in Schiller’s oeuvre in that it is subtitled “Schauspiel”– has always been taken to be the most easily accessible of his plays, appealing primarily, if not exclusively, to children and the Swiss, to opera lovers appreciating the son et lumière as well as to connoisseurs of familiar quotations, and, just possibly, to aficionados of kitsch, be they naive or sophisticated.3 Iring Fetscher, “Philister, Terrorist oder Reaktionär?: Schillers Tell und seine linken Kritiker,” (.).1 Walter Muschg, “Schiller ohne Wilhelm Tell,” in Muschg, Studien zur tragischen Literaturgeschichte (.).
0 kommentar(er)
