Talk:Sturm und Drang

This article badly needs cleanup so I am slapping a tag on it. If I have time I will get around to doing some initial work, but at a minimum I suggest that a proper breakdown be provided:

• origins of the term/movement
• aesthetic and artistic goals
• literary significance in the second half of the 18th c in Germany
• musical significance ditto
• End of Sturm und Drang and legacy

Plus anything else one can think of. Thoughts? Eusebeus 10:34, 6 October 2006 (UTC)Reply

I had a German teacher who called it "Storm and Stress" and I assume she's correct. Plus it sounds nicer to me. Ich 02:38, Jul 6, 2004 (UTC)

In Germany Sturm und Drang is not considered part of the Romanticism. There is the line of 1) Sturm und Drang (Goehte, Schiller and others), 2) Weimarer Klassik (Goethe, Schiller) and 3) Romantik. The difference is that Sturm und Drang is more critic then Romantik. And how is Alexander Lessing? Do you mean Gotthold Ephraim Lessing?

They mean "stress" as in "I stressed to him to do that". So stress can be considered correct. Therefore it will be edited.

Sturm und Drang has always been translated into English as Storm and Stress. Always. Eusebeus 10:34, 6 October 2006 (UTC)Reply

I'm also German but I'd translate it to Storm and Longing..--DerMeister 18:31, 3 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

While I find the tid bit about Harry Potter fascinating, unless it is elaborated to explain why Rowling did this and what relation Durmstrang might have to the Sturm and Drang movement, I truly fail to see why it is included in this article. I find that it only confuses the issue here (and I have enough trouble understanding Sturm and Drang as it is!) Anyway, just a suggestion... 85.212.30.87 11:25, 4 December 2005 (UTC)Reply

For readers of the Harry Potter series, it IS useful--the Durmstrang kids are dark and seem to exude the Sturm und Drang concept. Since Harry Potter seems to be widely read, it doesn't bother me that much to leave it in. Just my 2c. Rob 13:11, 27 January 2006 (UTC)Reply

While they might not be I don't see why a short list of trivial references to the movement wouldn't be worth mentioning, as long as their sources are mentioned and have good references. In addition to the Durmstrang school in the Harry Potter universe, the character Talon Karrde in the Star Wars Expanded Universe owned pet creatures named Sturm and Drang. Just a thought. Willbyr (talk | contribs) 15:48, 26 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

Even if the Potter reference is kept at all, it is in entirely the wrong section of the page. The fact that Rowling included a school (possibly) inspired by Sturm und Drang, that doesn't make anything Harry Potter a "Characteristic of Sturm und Drang." 85.178.26.200 (talk) 10:34, 22 January 2008 (UTC)Reply

I would also advocate the deletion of "Durmstrang" from this section. It is merely a pun, if at all - no matter what HP "dictionaries" interpret into it. Even though some (not all!) works of the Sturm and Drang period have darker undertones, I really do not see the connection between a young man working himself up over the love of his life (Werther) and pupils performing killing curses... (today is the 2nd of November, 08)

I can provide a bit more information on this topic, although I don't know if it should be added to the page. Starting in the 1920s with Stanley Hall (see eg. http://www.psyking.net/id183.htm) psychoanalytic theorists borrowed the term "Sturm und Drang" to describe the emotional turbulence of adolescence. You still hear the term used occasionally by adolescent psychiatrists. JK Rowling could well have been inspired by this usage of the term to make a pun for a school full of hormone charged misfits. Cooker (talk) 01:47, 27 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

I just created this article as a stub. From the above discussion, it appears that this article existed once upon a time and was deleted. We should try to obtain the text of the deleted article. — goethean ॐ 18:20, 16 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

That would appear to be impossible. If you read the logs to the article, it shows that Jimbo Wales apparently deleted the previous version due to copyright infringements and the like. However, I just checked Google's cache, and it's still there.[1] [Note: by 01:44, 26 May 2006 (UTC) the page has been recached.] — ^ignis _scripta 18:26, 16 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Aha. — goethean ॐ 18:34, 16 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

I honestly think the previous Pop culture references section had little-to-no value whatsoever and oughtn't to be included while we recreate this article leaning toward much more valuable depths. — ^ignis _scripta 19:42, 16 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

The current article tells who was involved and what the principal works are, but fails to say what Sturm und Drang is. What's it about? How would you know it if you read it? Jorend 18:49, 31 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

I second that. Readers should be given an explaination of the style/philosophy/concept/theme associated with this literary movement. I've seen the phrase "Sturm & Drang" referenced in several modern and avant-garde forms of media (see authors Salman Rushdie and Tom Robbins, songwriter Tom Waits, industrial rock band KMFDM), so it would be nice to know just what is being referenced, rather the somewhat ambiguous "German literary movement". Now I'd gladly provide the necessary info, but frankly I'm quite uneducated in this movement. --buck 16:57, 12 June 2006 (UTC)Reply

Hölderin an the tree, where are? --204.116.91.20 12:12, 11 June 2006 (UTC)Reply

The following comment was added to the article by 195.52.112.34 (talk · contribs)

Das meiste was hir steht ist nicht immer richtig. Er ist zumbeispiel in 1737 geboren, das sagen manche jedenfalls. Goethe ging und produtzierte kinder mit seiner ersten Frau. Er hatte drei, wenn alles stimmt, worüber mann redet, doch ich glaube er hatte nur zwei. Denn die erste ist gestorben

— goethean ॐ 14:32, 21 June 2006 (UTC)Reply

A loose translation of the text that this German was kind enough to post (I don't think he trusts his English) "Most of what is here isn't exactly correct. It (Sturm & Drang) was born in 1737, according to many people, at any rate. Goete went and produced children with his first wife. He had three, if everything is correct that I hear, but I believe he had but two. Because the first one died. Ich (talk) 16:28, 2 October 2006 (UTC)Reply

Wunderbar. — goethean ॐ 17:07, 2 October 2006 (UTC)Reply

In the German w/p the article on Sturm und Drang gives a range of different details. Could the English w/p be harmonised with the German details? Ozdaren 09:36, 30 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

Should the section of this article on literary Sturm und Drang not come first, and then the music section? - Just for simple reasons of chronology, firstly, but it could also be argued that the literature is the more what one associates with the movement? John the revelator 15:20, 28 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

I fully agree, I am switching their places. Somebody can undo if they feel it's wrong - but music tends to always be a little behind visual/literary art, tending to take its cue from it once it's been establish there, and this is no exception Lethesl 10:30, 21 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

Why no mention of Beethoven, Berlioz (and even Wagner) ? Surely these are more canonically "Sturm und Drang" than Haydn? 87.194.171.29 (talk) 03:07, 20 April 2008 (UTC) Specifically Beethoven: His final piano sonata, Opus 111 is often referred to as the "Sturm und Drang" sonata. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.226.32.243 (talk) 20:39, 13 March 2011 (UTC)Reply

This is undoubtedly true. If anyone were asked to name a composer who followed the "Sturm und Drang" style, one would surely name Beethoven! His Symphony No. 5 and Piano Concerto No. 3 are surely paragons of the musical movement. To declare that this period ended in about 1780, when Beethoven was a mere child is preposterous. Wagner, as this above commenter points out, was composing in the "Sturm und Drang" style, at least in some part, long after the death of Haydn or even Beethoven. This article is hence is desperate need of amendment. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NoldorinElf (talk • contribs) 23:35, 10 October 2012 (UTC)Reply

It is worth pointing that this is a well established term in use in literary history in German departments in the English-speaking countries - since before World War II, if not already before World War I. Obviously, Storm and Stress is a conventional and not an exact or literal translation, presumably chosen partly because of the alliteration, which makes it a rather catchy expression.

The notion implicit in some of the comments above that there is some great depth of meaning hidden in the German term is misleading. In German, Sturm und Drang is simply a convenient term for German Pre-Romantic literature of the period c. 1767-81. For what it's worth, Drang means urge, yearning and had nothing to do with stress in the sense of the stress of modern life. However, this is really beside the point as the German term is just a convenient, fixed expression. The key point is that this literature was rebellious and emotional. Norvo (talk) 04:27, 20 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

The first sentence of the lead is strange: 'turbulence isn't really a common translation for 'Sturm' at all. This is a mistake and needs to be modified; if there are no objections, I'll just delete everything in the parentheses before "usually translated as..." Sindinero (talk) 21:38, 22 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

How on Earth is Beethoven not listed or even mentioned in the list of Sturm und Drang composers? There is perhaps no greater example of the movement than him, yet the other more purely classical/restrained composers (especially Haydn) are mentioned in favour. This definitely needs to be remedied. Any other thoughts on this? Noldorin (talk) 22:51, 25 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

I was taught that "Sturm und Drang" had intentional double-meanings:

Sturm = Storm = Tempest = Disorder

Drang = Urge = Needs

(relating to the negative "environment of the actors")

the other meaning is:

Sturm (from "stürmen") = Charge (like a military charge)

Drang (from "drängen") = Push (or: Drang = Sehnsucht)

(relating to the "reaction of the actors" and the original double meaning of the play-title, which was about the revolution = military)

If the double-meaning is an accepted view, I think this information should be added. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RicardAnufriev (talk • contribs) 19:16, 17 October 2012 (UTC)Reply

I don't know if this has any bearing, but I noticed in the Star Wars Thrawn Trilogy, Talon Karrde's pet vornskr are named Sturm and Drang, their names reference this term.50.88.218.76 (talk) 15:25, 29 December 2014 (UTC)Reply

I'm surprised that Ludwig van Beethoven is not included on this list. Considering Beethoven was a major player in the Sturm und Drang style, particularly with Symphony No. 3 "Eroica" in E-Flat Major. He used this style while he was expressing his frustration over going deaf, and his mental health was becoming unstable.

http://www.economist.com/news/books-and-arts/21618671-why-yet-another-biography-beethoven-worth-adding-your-shelves-sturm-und-drang — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:30A:2C81:63F0:890B:C556:897:130F (talk) 23:23, 14 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

Yes... maybe it's restricted by time period? I think that's silly though. Beethoven has many works or movements of a "Sturm und Drang" style. His "Tempest" sonata immediately comes to mind too. 2A02:C7F:C617:6600:28B3:7858:C216:1DB6 (talk) 22:12, 9 June 2019 (UTC)Reply

"Sturm and Drang" was only a literarical genre. Is has nothing to do with music. Byside it never had any influence in austria. You can't change the meaning of terms just like you want.

The English Wikipedia article is the only which contains a postulated connection to music. All articles in other languages do not mention any of this, not even the German article. That's just by the way.

'The Sturm und Drang movement did not last long; according to Betty Waterhouse it began in 1771 and ended in 1778 (Waterhouse v). '

Who is Betty Waterhouse and what happened to the citation?--Bluedawe 22:01, 27 February 2022 (UTC)Reply