Schiller versus Bürger: An Eighteenth-Century Debate on Nature of Popular Art

This article examines a pivotal aesthetic debate in late eighteenth-century German literature between Friedrich Schiller (1759–1805) and Gottfried August Bürger (1747–1794) concerning the nature of “popular” art (Volkskunst). The analysis focuses on the core texts of this polemic: Schiller’s critical review, “On Bürger’s Poems,” and Bürger’s retaliatory piece, “Preliminary Anti-Critique.” The study aims to delineate the contrasting literary-aesthetic paradigms of Schiller, who advocated an idealizing, classicist art, and Bürger, who championed a democratic, realist art. The investigation establishes that Bürger argued for a realist principle of “popularity” (Volkstümlichkeit), grounded in the study of folklore and the truthful representation of reality, positing that the poet must be immersed “among the people.” In contrast, Schiller defended an idealist approach, which required the poet to create a sublime ideal and to “descend” to the people in order to ennoble them. It is demonstrated that Bürger’s concept affirmed the work’s fidelity to life, whereas Schiller’s position led to elitism and schematicism. The author concludes that this controversy was inevitable, as it reflected a fundamental divergence between the classicist and preRomantic paradigms. The study further argues that Schiller’s rebuttal of Bürger’s stance served to embed the tenets of a new classicism into artistic theory. The novelty of this research lies in its detailed comparative analysis of the arguments put forth by both sides, which reveals the ontological foundations of their aesthetic disagreement. 

German Enlightenment, Sturm und Drang, Friedrich Schiller, Gottfried August Bürger, Popular Art, Schiller's review of Bürger's poems, German Classicism, Romanticism in Germany