niryuu/sni-each-converted huggingface dataset:
The story is told from the point of view of a first-person narrator, about whom little is revealed before the final pages. Before the story itself, an extended meditation appears on the nature of human names, and that of Z. Marcas specifically:
MARCAS! R p tez-vous   vous-m me ce nom compos  de deux syllabes, n'y trouvez-vous pas une sinistre signifiance? Ne vous semble-t-il pas que l'homme qui le porte doive  tre martyris ? Quoique  trange et sauvage, ce nom a pourtant le droit d'aller   la post rit ; il est bien compos , il se prononce facilement, il a cette bri vet  voulue pour les noms c l bres ... Ne voyez-vous pas dans la construction du Z une allure contrari e? ne figure-t-elle pas le zigzag al atoire et fantasque d'une vie tourment e?
MARCAS! say this two-syllabled name again and again; do you not feel as if it had some sinister meaning? Does it not seem to you that its owner must be doomed to martyrdom? Though foreign, savage, the name has a right to be handed down to posterity; it is well constructed, easily pronounced, and has the brevity that beseems a famous name ... Do you not discern in that letter Z an adverse influence? Does it not prefigure the wayward and fantastic progress of a storm-tossed life?
The narrator, Charles, lives with his friend Juste in a large boarding-house populated almost entirely with students like themselves (Charles is studying law and Juste medicine). The sole exception is their middle-aged neighbor, Z. Marcas, of whom they see only momentary glimpses in the hall. They learn that he is a copyist, and living on an extremely small salary. When the students find themselves lacking the funds for tobacco, Marcas offers them some of his own. They become friends, and he tells them the story of his political career.
Recognizing at an early age that he had an incisive mind for politics, Marcas had allied himself with an unnamed man of some fame who lacked wisdom and insight. They became a team, with the other man serving as the public face and Marcas as the advisor. Once his associate had ascended into office, however, he abandoned Marcas, then hired and abandoned him again. Marcas was left poor and unknown, resigned to duplicate the writing of others for very little pay.
Eventually his politician friend seeks his help for a third time. Marcas is dismissive, but the students convince him to give the process one last chance. After three months, Marcas appears at the boarding house again, sick and exhausted. The politician never visits Marcas, who soon dies. The students are the only mourners at his funeral, and  disheartened by the tragedy  leave France.
Output: What is Z. Marcas''s occupation?
The story is told from the point of view of a first-person narrator, about whom little is revealed before the final pages. Before the story itself, an extended meditation appears on the nature of human names, and that of Z. Marcas specifically:
MARCAS! R p tez-vous   vous-m me ce nom compos  de deux syllabes, n'y trouvez-vous pas une sinistre signifiance? Ne vous semble-t-il pas que l'homme qui le porte doive  tre martyris ? Quoique  trange et sauvage, ce nom a pourtant le droit d'aller   la post rit ; il est bien compos , il se prononce facilement, il a cette bri vet  voulue pour les noms c l bres ... Ne voyez-vous pas dans la construction du Z une allure contrari e? ne figure-t-elle pas le zigzag al atoire et fantasque d'une vie tourment e?
MARCAS! say this two-syllabled name again and again; do you not feel as if it had some sinister meaning? Does it not seem to you that its owner must be doomed to martyrdom? Though foreign, savage, the name has a right to be handed down to posterity; it is well constructed, easily pronounced, and has the brevity that beseems a famous name ... Do you not discern in that letter Z an adverse influence? Does it not prefigure the wayward and fantastic progress of a storm-tossed life?
The narrator, Charles, lives with his friend Juste in a large boarding-house populated almost entirely with students like themselves (Charles is studying law and Juste medicine). The sole exception is their middle-aged neighbor, Z. Marcas, of whom they see only momentary glimpses in the hall. They learn that he is a copyist, and living on an extremely small salary. When the students find themselves lacking the funds for tobacco, Marcas offers them some of his own. They become friends, and he tells them the story of his political career.
Recognizing at an early age that he had an incisive mind for politics, Marcas had allied himself with an unnamed man of some fame who lacked wisdom and insight. They became a team, with the other man serving as the public face and Marcas as the advisor. Once his associate had ascended into office, however, he abandoned Marcas, then hired and abandoned him again. Marcas was left poor and unknown, resigned to duplicate the writing of others for very little pay.
Eventually his politician friend seeks his help for a third time. Marcas is dismissive, but the students convince him to give the process one last chance. After three months, Marcas appears at the boarding house again, sick and exhausted. The politician never visits Marcas, who soon dies. The students are the only mourners at his funeral, and  disheartened by the tragedy  leave France.
Output: Who is the only non-student living in the boarding-home?
The story is told from the point of view of a first-person narrator, about whom little is revealed before the final pages. Before the story itself, an extended meditation appears on the nature of human names, and that of Z. Marcas specifically:
MARCAS! R p tez-vous   vous-m me ce nom compos  de deux syllabes, n'y trouvez-vous pas une sinistre signifiance? Ne vous semble-t-il pas que l'homme qui le porte doive  tre martyris ? Quoique  trange et sauvage, ce nom a pourtant le droit d'aller   la post rit ; il est bien compos , il se prononce facilement, il a cette bri vet  voulue pour les noms c l bres ... Ne voyez-vous pas dans la construction du Z une allure contrari e? ne figure-t-elle pas le zigzag al atoire et fantasque d'une vie tourment e?
MARCAS! say this two-syllabled name again and again; do you not feel as if it had some sinister meaning? Does it not seem to you that its owner must be doomed to martyrdom? Though foreign, savage, the name has a right to be handed down to posterity; it is well constructed, easily pronounced, and has the brevity that beseems a famous name ... Do you not discern in that letter Z an adverse influence? Does it not prefigure the wayward and fantastic progress of a storm-tossed life?
The narrator, Charles, lives with his friend Juste in a large boarding-house populated almost entirely with students like themselves (Charles is studying law and Juste medicine). The sole exception is their middle-aged neighbor, Z. Marcas, of whom they see only momentary glimpses in the hall. They learn that he is a copyist, and living on an extremely small salary. When the students find themselves lacking the funds for tobacco, Marcas offers them some of his own. They become friends, and he tells them the story of his political career.
Recognizing at an early age that he had an incisive mind for politics, Marcas had allied himself with an unnamed man of some fame who lacked wisdom and insight. They became a team, with the other man serving as the public face and Marcas as the advisor. Once his associate had ascended into office, however, he abandoned Marcas, then hired and abandoned him again. Marcas was left poor and unknown, resigned to duplicate the writing of others for very little pay.
Eventually his politician friend seeks his help for a third time. Marcas is dismissive, but the students convince him to give the process one last chance. After three months, Marcas appears at the boarding house again, sick and exhausted. The politician never visits Marcas, who soon dies. The students are the only mourners at his funeral, and  disheartened by the tragedy  leave France.
Output: What does Marcas offer Charles and Juste?
The story is told from the point of view of a first-person narrator, about whom little is revealed before the final pages. Before the story itself, an extended meditation appears on the nature of human names, and that of Z. Marcas specifically:
MARCAS! R p tez-vous   vous-m me ce nom compos  de deux syllabes, n'y trouvez-vous pas une sinistre signifiance? Ne vous semble-t-il pas que l'homme qui le porte doive  tre martyris ? Quoique  trange et sauvage, ce nom a pourtant le droit d'aller   la post rit ; il est bien compos , il se prononce facilement, il a cette bri vet  voulue pour les noms c l bres ... Ne voyez-vous pas dans la construction du Z une allure contrari e? ne figure-t-elle pas le zigzag al atoire et fantasque d'une vie tourment e?
MARCAS! say this two-syllabled name again and again; do you not feel as if it had some sinister meaning? Does it not seem to you that its owner must be doomed to martyrdom? Though foreign, savage, the name has a right to be handed down to posterity; it is well constructed, easily pronounced, and has the brevity that beseems a famous name ... Do you not discern in that letter Z an adverse influence? Does it not prefigure the wayward and fantastic progress of a storm-tossed life?
The narrator, Charles, lives with his friend Juste in a large boarding-house populated almost entirely with students like themselves (Charles is studying law and Juste medicine). The sole exception is their middle-aged neighbor, Z. Marcas, of whom they see only momentary glimpses in the hall. They learn that he is a copyist, and living on an extremely small salary. When the students find themselves lacking the funds for tobacco, Marcas offers them some of his own. They become friends, and he tells them the story of his political career.
Recognizing at an early age that he had an incisive mind for politics, Marcas had allied himself with an unnamed man of some fame who lacked wisdom and insight. They became a team, with the other man serving as the public face and Marcas as the advisor. Once his associate had ascended into office, however, he abandoned Marcas, then hired and abandoned him again. Marcas was left poor and unknown, resigned to duplicate the writing of others for very little pay.
Eventually his politician friend seeks his help for a third time. Marcas is dismissive, but the students convince him to give the process one last chance. After three months, Marcas appears at the boarding house again, sick and exhausted. The politician never visits Marcas, who soon dies. The students are the only mourners at his funeral, and  disheartened by the tragedy  leave France.
Output: Before the story itself begins, what is the reader shown?
The story is told from the point of view of a first-person narrator, about whom little is revealed before the final pages. Before the story itself, an extended meditation appears on the nature of human names, and that of Z. Marcas specifically:
MARCAS! R p tez-vous   vous-m me ce nom compos  de deux syllabes, n'y trouvez-vous pas une sinistre signifiance? Ne vous semble-t-il pas que l'homme qui le porte doive  tre martyris ? Quoique  trange et sauvage, ce nom a pourtant le droit d'aller   la post rit ; il est bien compos , il se prononce facilement, il a cette bri vet  voulue pour les noms c l bres ... Ne voyez-vous pas dans la construction du Z une allure contrari e? ne figure-t-elle pas le zigzag al atoire et fantasque d'une vie tourment e?
MARCAS! say this two-syllabled name again and again; do you not feel as if it had some sinister meaning? Does it not seem to you that its owner must be doomed to martyrdom? Though foreign, savage, the name has a right to be handed down to posterity; it is well constructed, easily pronounced, and has the brevity that beseems a famous name ... Do you not discern in that letter Z an adverse influence? Does it not prefigure the wayward and fantastic progress of a storm-tossed life?
The narrator, Charles, lives with his friend Juste in a large boarding-house populated almost entirely with students like themselves (Charles is studying law and Juste medicine). The sole exception is their middle-aged neighbor, Z. Marcas, of whom they see only momentary glimpses in the hall. They learn that he is a copyist, and living on an extremely small salary. When the students find themselves lacking the funds for tobacco, Marcas offers them some of his own. They become friends, and he tells them the story of his political career.
Recognizing at an early age that he had an incisive mind for politics, Marcas had allied himself with an unnamed man of some fame who lacked wisdom and insight. They became a team, with the other man serving as the public face and Marcas as the advisor. Once his associate had ascended into office, however, he abandoned Marcas, then hired and abandoned him again. Marcas was left poor and unknown, resigned to duplicate the writing of others for very little pay.
Eventually his politician friend seeks his help for a third time. Marcas is dismissive, but the students convince him to give the process one last chance. After three months, Marcas appears at the boarding house again, sick and exhausted. The politician never visits Marcas, who soon dies. The students are the only mourners at his funeral, and  disheartened by the tragedy  leave France.
Output: What does Z. Marcas do for a living?
The story is told from the point of view of a first-person narrator, about whom little is revealed before the final pages. Before the story itself, an extended meditation appears on the nature of human names, and that of Z. Marcas specifically:
MARCAS! R p tez-vous   vous-m me ce nom compos  de deux syllabes, n'y trouvez-vous pas une sinistre signifiance? Ne vous semble-t-il pas que l'homme qui le porte doive  tre martyris ? Quoique  trange et sauvage, ce nom a pourtant le droit d'aller   la post rit ; il est bien compos , il se prononce facilement, il a cette bri vet  voulue pour les noms c l bres ... Ne voyez-vous pas dans la construction du Z une allure contrari e? ne figure-t-elle pas le zigzag al atoire et fantasque d'une vie tourment e?
MARCAS! say this two-syllabled name again and again; do you not feel as if it had some sinister meaning? Does it not seem to you that its owner must be doomed to martyrdom? Though foreign, savage, the name has a right to be handed down to posterity; it is well constructed, easily pronounced, and has the brevity that beseems a famous name ... Do you not discern in that letter Z an adverse influence? Does it not prefigure the wayward and fantastic progress of a storm-tossed life?
The narrator, Charles, lives with his friend Juste in a large boarding-house populated almost entirely with students like themselves (Charles is studying law and Juste medicine). The sole exception is their middle-aged neighbor, Z. Marcas, of whom they see only momentary glimpses in the hall. They learn that he is a copyist, and living on an extremely small salary. When the students find themselves lacking the funds for tobacco, Marcas offers them some of his own. They become friends, and he tells them the story of his political career.
Recognizing at an early age that he had an incisive mind for politics, Marcas had allied himself with an unnamed man of some fame who lacked wisdom and insight. They became a team, with the other man serving as the public face and Marcas as the advisor. Once his associate had ascended into office, however, he abandoned Marcas, then hired and abandoned him again. Marcas was left poor and unknown, resigned to duplicate the writing of others for very little pay.
Eventually his politician friend seeks his help for a third time. Marcas is dismissive, but the students convince him to give the process one last chance. After three months, Marcas appears at the boarding house again, sick and exhausted. The politician never visits Marcas, who soon dies. The students are the only mourners at his funeral, and  disheartened by the tragedy  leave France.
Output: What does Charles study?
The story is told from the point of view of a first-person narrator, about whom little is revealed before the final pages. Before the story itself, an extended meditation appears on the nature of human names, and that of Z. Marcas specifically:
MARCAS! R p tez-vous   vous-m me ce nom compos  de deux syllabes, n'y trouvez-vous pas une sinistre signifiance? Ne vous semble-t-il pas que l'homme qui le porte doive  tre martyris ? Quoique  trange et sauvage, ce nom a pourtant le droit d'aller   la post rit ; il est bien compos , il se prononce facilement, il a cette bri vet  voulue pour les noms c l bres ... Ne voyez-vous pas dans la construction du Z une allure contrari e? ne figure-t-elle pas le zigzag al atoire et fantasque d'une vie tourment e?
MARCAS! say this two-syllabled name again and again; do you not feel as if it had some sinister meaning? Does it not seem to you that its owner must be doomed to martyrdom? Though foreign, savage, the name has a right to be handed down to posterity; it is well constructed, easily pronounced, and has the brevity that beseems a famous name ... Do you not discern in that letter Z an adverse influence? Does it not prefigure the wayward and fantastic progress of a storm-tossed life?
The narrator, Charles, lives with his friend Juste in a large boarding-house populated almost entirely with students like themselves (Charles is studying law and Juste medicine). The sole exception is their middle-aged neighbor, Z. Marcas, of whom they see only momentary glimpses in the hall. They learn that he is a copyist, and living on an extremely small salary. When the students find themselves lacking the funds for tobacco, Marcas offers them some of his own. They become friends, and he tells them the story of his political career.
Recognizing at an early age that he had an incisive mind for politics, Marcas had allied himself with an unnamed man of some fame who lacked wisdom and insight. They became a team, with the other man serving as the public face and Marcas as the advisor. Once his associate had ascended into office, however, he abandoned Marcas, then hired and abandoned him again. Marcas was left poor and unknown, resigned to duplicate the writing of others for very little pay.
Eventually his politician friend seeks his help for a third time. Marcas is dismissive, but the students convince him to give the process one last chance. After three months, Marcas appears at the boarding house again, sick and exhausted. The politician never visits Marcas, who soon dies. The students are the only mourners at his funeral, and  disheartened by the tragedy  leave France.
Output: Who shows up at Marcas's funeral?
The story is told from the point of view of a first-person narrator, about whom little is revealed before the final pages. Before the story itself, an extended meditation appears on the nature of human names, and that of Z. Marcas specifically:
MARCAS! R p tez-vous   vous-m me ce nom compos  de deux syllabes, n'y trouvez-vous pas une sinistre signifiance? Ne vous semble-t-il pas que l'homme qui le porte doive  tre martyris ? Quoique  trange et sauvage, ce nom a pourtant le droit d'aller   la post rit ; il est bien compos , il se prononce facilement, il a cette bri vet  voulue pour les noms c l bres ... Ne voyez-vous pas dans la construction du Z une allure contrari e? ne figure-t-elle pas le zigzag al atoire et fantasque d'une vie tourment e?
MARCAS! say this two-syllabled name again and again; do you not feel as if it had some sinister meaning? Does it not seem to you that its owner must be doomed to martyrdom? Though foreign, savage, the name has a right to be handed down to posterity; it is well constructed, easily pronounced, and has the brevity that beseems a famous name ... Do you not discern in that letter Z an adverse influence? Does it not prefigure the wayward and fantastic progress of a storm-tossed life?
The narrator, Charles, lives with his friend Juste in a large boarding-house populated almost entirely with students like themselves (Charles is studying law and Juste medicine). The sole exception is their middle-aged neighbor, Z. Marcas, of whom they see only momentary glimpses in the hall. They learn that he is a copyist, and living on an extremely small salary. When the students find themselves lacking the funds for tobacco, Marcas offers them some of his own. They become friends, and he tells them the story of his political career.
Recognizing at an early age that he had an incisive mind for politics, Marcas had allied himself with an unnamed man of some fame who lacked wisdom and insight. They became a team, with the other man serving as the public face and Marcas as the advisor. Once his associate had ascended into office, however, he abandoned Marcas, then hired and abandoned him again. Marcas was left poor and unknown, resigned to duplicate the writing of others for very little pay.
Eventually his politician friend seeks his help for a third time. Marcas is dismissive, but the students convince him to give the process one last chance. After three months, Marcas appears at the boarding house again, sick and exhausted. The politician never visits Marcas, who soon dies. The students are the only mourners at his funeral, and  disheartened by the tragedy  leave France.
Output: What is Marcas' job?
The play loosely follows the life of Joan of Arc. It contains a prologue introducing the important characters, followed by five acts. Each dramatizes a significant event in Joan's life. Down into Act IV the play departs from history in only secondary details (e.g. by making Joan kill people in battle, and by shifting the reconciliation between the Armagnacs and the Burgundians from 1435 to 1430). Thereafter, however, the plot is entirely free. Joan is about to kill an English knight when, on removing his helmet, she at once falls in love with him, and spares him. Blaming herself for what she regards as a betrayal of her mission, then, when at Reims she is publicly accused of sorcery, she refuses to defend herself, is assumed to be guilty, and dismissed from the French court and army. Captured by the English, she witnesses from her prison cell a battle in which the French are being decisively defeated, breaks her bonds, and dashes out to save the day. She dies as victory is won, her honour and her reputation both restored.
The play reflects the new nationalism and militarism of the budding nineteenth century, and also the Kantian ideal of the need to subject emotion to moral principle.
The line "Mit der Dummheit k mpfen G tter selbst vergebens" (III, 6; Talbot) translates into English as "Against stupidity, the gods themselves contend in vain." This provided Isaac Asimov with the title of his novel The Gods Themselves.
This was the most performed (at least in Germany) of all Schiller's plays down to the Great War. In modern post-war Germany, its militarism is an embarrassment, but the dramatic power of the last two acts keeps the play on the stage.
Output: Who does Joan fall in love with?
The play loosely follows the life of Joan of Arc. It contains a prologue introducing the important characters, followed by five acts. Each dramatizes a significant event in Joan's life. Down into Act IV the play departs from history in only secondary details (e.g. by making Joan kill people in battle, and by shifting the reconciliation between the Armagnacs and the Burgundians from 1435 to 1430). Thereafter, however, the plot is entirely free. Joan is about to kill an English knight when, on removing his helmet, she at once falls in love with him, and spares him. Blaming herself for what she regards as a betrayal of her mission, then, when at Reims she is publicly accused of sorcery, she refuses to defend herself, is assumed to be guilty, and dismissed from the French court and army. Captured by the English, she witnesses from her prison cell a battle in which the French are being decisively defeated, breaks her bonds, and dashes out to save the day. She dies as victory is won, her honour and her reputation both restored.
The play reflects the new nationalism and militarism of the budding nineteenth century, and also the Kantian ideal of the need to subject emotion to moral principle.
The line "Mit der Dummheit k mpfen G tter selbst vergebens" (III, 6; Talbot) translates into English as "Against stupidity, the gods themselves contend in vain." This provided Isaac Asimov with the title of his novel The Gods Themselves.
This was the most performed (at least in Germany) of all Schiller's plays down to the Great War. In modern post-war Germany, its militarism is an embarrassment, but the dramatic power of the last two acts keeps the play on the stage.
Output: Who is Joan of Arc captured by?
The play loosely follows the life of Joan of Arc. It contains a prologue introducing the important characters, followed by five acts. Each dramatizes a significant event in Joan's life. Down into Act IV the play departs from history in only secondary details (e.g. by making Joan kill people in battle, and by shifting the reconciliation between the Armagnacs and the Burgundians from 1435 to 1430). Thereafter, however, the plot is entirely free. Joan is about to kill an English knight when, on removing his helmet, she at once falls in love with him, and spares him. Blaming herself for what she regards as a betrayal of her mission, then, when at Reims she is publicly accused of sorcery, she refuses to defend herself, is assumed to be guilty, and dismissed from the French court and army. Captured by the English, she witnesses from her prison cell a battle in which the French are being decisively defeated, breaks her bonds, and dashes out to save the day. She dies as victory is won, her honour and her reputation both restored.
The play reflects the new nationalism and militarism of the budding nineteenth century, and also the Kantian ideal of the need to subject emotion to moral principle.
The line "Mit der Dummheit k mpfen G tter selbst vergebens" (III, 6; Talbot) translates into English as "Against stupidity, the gods themselves contend in vain." This provided Isaac Asimov with the title of his novel The Gods Themselves.
This was the most performed (at least in Germany) of all Schiller's plays down to the Great War. In modern post-war Germany, its militarism is an embarrassment, but the dramatic power of the last two acts keeps the play on the stage.
Output: After her accusation, how is Joan punished?
The play loosely follows the life of Joan of Arc. It contains a prologue introducing the important characters, followed by five acts. Each dramatizes a significant event in Joan's life. Down into Act IV the play departs from history in only secondary details (e.g. by making Joan kill people in battle, and by shifting the reconciliation between the Armagnacs and the Burgundians from 1435 to 1430). Thereafter, however, the plot is entirely free. Joan is about to kill an English knight when, on removing his helmet, she at once falls in love with him, and spares him. Blaming herself for what she regards as a betrayal of her mission, then, when at Reims she is publicly accused of sorcery, she refuses to defend herself, is assumed to be guilty, and dismissed from the French court and army. Captured by the English, she witnesses from her prison cell a battle in which the French are being decisively defeated, breaks her bonds, and dashes out to save the day. She dies as victory is won, her honour and her reputation both restored.
The play reflects the new nationalism and militarism of the budding nineteenth century, and also the Kantian ideal of the need to subject emotion to moral principle.
The line "Mit der Dummheit k mpfen G tter selbst vergebens" (III, 6; Talbot) translates into English as "Against stupidity, the gods themselves contend in vain." This provided Isaac Asimov with the title of his novel The Gods Themselves.
This was the most performed (at least in Germany) of all Schiller's plays down to the Great War. In modern post-war Germany, its militarism is an embarrassment, but the dramatic power of the last two acts keeps the play on the stage.
Output: As victory is won, what happens to Joan of Arc?
The play loosely follows the life of Joan of Arc. It contains a prologue introducing the important characters, followed by five acts. Each dramatizes a significant event in Joan's life. Down into Act IV the play departs from history in only secondary details (e.g. by making Joan kill people in battle, and by shifting the reconciliation between the Armagnacs and the Burgundians from 1435 to 1430). Thereafter, however, the plot is entirely free. Joan is about to kill an English knight when, on removing his helmet, she at once falls in love with him, and spares him. Blaming herself for what she regards as a betrayal of her mission, then, when at Reims she is publicly accused of sorcery, she refuses to defend herself, is assumed to be guilty, and dismissed from the French court and army. Captured by the English, she witnesses from her prison cell a battle in which the French are being decisively defeated, breaks her bonds, and dashes out to save the day. She dies as victory is won, her honour and her reputation both restored.
The play reflects the new nationalism and militarism of the budding nineteenth century, and also the Kantian ideal of the need to subject emotion to moral principle.
The line "Mit der Dummheit k mpfen G tter selbst vergebens" (III, 6; Talbot) translates into English as "Against stupidity, the gods themselves contend in vain." This provided Isaac Asimov with the title of his novel The Gods Themselves.
This was the most performed (at least in Germany) of all Schiller's plays down to the Great War. In modern post-war Germany, its militarism is an embarrassment, but the dramatic power of the last two acts keeps the play on the stage.
Output: Why is Joan of Arc assumed to be guilty?
The play loosely follows the life of Joan of Arc. It contains a prologue introducing the important characters, followed by five acts. Each dramatizes a significant event in Joan's life. Down into Act IV the play departs from history in only secondary details (e.g. by making Joan kill people in battle, and by shifting the reconciliation between the Armagnacs and the Burgundians from 1435 to 1430). Thereafter, however, the plot is entirely free. Joan is about to kill an English knight when, on removing his helmet, she at once falls in love with him, and spares him. Blaming herself for what she regards as a betrayal of her mission, then, when at Reims she is publicly accused of sorcery, she refuses to defend herself, is assumed to be guilty, and dismissed from the French court and army. Captured by the English, she witnesses from her prison cell a battle in which the French are being decisively defeated, breaks her bonds, and dashes out to save the day. She dies as victory is won, her honour and her reputation both restored.
The play reflects the new nationalism and militarism of the budding nineteenth century, and also the Kantian ideal of the need to subject emotion to moral principle.
The line "Mit der Dummheit k mpfen G tter selbst vergebens" (III, 6; Talbot) translates into English as "Against stupidity, the gods themselves contend in vain." This provided Isaac Asimov with the title of his novel The Gods Themselves.
This was the most performed (at least in Germany) of all Schiller's plays down to the Great War. In modern post-war Germany, its militarism is an embarrassment, but the dramatic power of the last two acts keeps the play on the stage.
Output: What does Joan of Arc decide to do when she's about to kill the English knight?
The play loosely follows the life of Joan of Arc. It contains a prologue introducing the important characters, followed by five acts. Each dramatizes a significant event in Joan's life. Down into Act IV the play departs from history in only secondary details (e.g. by making Joan kill people in battle, and by shifting the reconciliation between the Armagnacs and the Burgundians from 1435 to 1430). Thereafter, however, the plot is entirely free. Joan is about to kill an English knight when, on removing his helmet, she at once falls in love with him, and spares him. Blaming herself for what she regards as a betrayal of her mission, then, when at Reims she is publicly accused of sorcery, she refuses to defend herself, is assumed to be guilty, and dismissed from the French court and army. Captured by the English, she witnesses from her prison cell a battle in which the French are being decisively defeated, breaks her bonds, and dashes out to save the day. She dies as victory is won, her honour and her reputation both restored.
The play reflects the new nationalism and militarism of the budding nineteenth century, and also the Kantian ideal of the need to subject emotion to moral principle.
The line "Mit der Dummheit k mpfen G tter selbst vergebens" (III, 6; Talbot) translates into English as "Against stupidity, the gods themselves contend in vain." This provided Isaac Asimov with the title of his novel The Gods Themselves.
This was the most performed (at least in Germany) of all Schiller's plays down to the Great War. In modern post-war Germany, its militarism is an embarrassment, but the dramatic power of the last two acts keeps the play on the stage.
Output: Why does Joan of Arc blame herself?
The play loosely follows the life of Joan of Arc. It contains a prologue introducing the important characters, followed by five acts. Each dramatizes a significant event in Joan's life. Down into Act IV the play departs from history in only secondary details (e.g. by making Joan kill people in battle, and by shifting the reconciliation between the Armagnacs and the Burgundians from 1435 to 1430). Thereafter, however, the plot is entirely free. Joan is about to kill an English knight when, on removing his helmet, she at once falls in love with him, and spares him. Blaming herself for what she regards as a betrayal of her mission, then, when at Reims she is publicly accused of sorcery, she refuses to defend herself, is assumed to be guilty, and dismissed from the French court and army. Captured by the English, she witnesses from her prison cell a battle in which the French are being decisively defeated, breaks her bonds, and dashes out to save the day. She dies as victory is won, her honour and her reputation both restored.
The play reflects the new nationalism and militarism of the budding nineteenth century, and also the Kantian ideal of the need to subject emotion to moral principle.
The line "Mit der Dummheit k mpfen G tter selbst vergebens" (III, 6; Talbot) translates into English as "Against stupidity, the gods themselves contend in vain." This provided Isaac Asimov with the title of his novel The Gods Themselves.
This was the most performed (at least in Germany) of all Schiller's plays down to the Great War. In modern post-war Germany, its militarism is an embarrassment, but the dramatic power of the last two acts keeps the play on the stage.
Output: What happens when the English knight removes his helmet?
The play loosely follows the life of Joan of Arc. It contains a prologue introducing the important characters, followed by five acts. Each dramatizes a significant event in Joan's life. Down into Act IV the play departs from history in only secondary details (e.g. by making Joan kill people in battle, and by shifting the reconciliation between the Armagnacs and the Burgundians from 1435 to 1430). Thereafter, however, the plot is entirely free. Joan is about to kill an English knight when, on removing his helmet, she at once falls in love with him, and spares him. Blaming herself for what she regards as a betrayal of her mission, then, when at Reims she is publicly accused of sorcery, she refuses to defend herself, is assumed to be guilty, and dismissed from the French court and army. Captured by the English, she witnesses from her prison cell a battle in which the French are being decisively defeated, breaks her bonds, and dashes out to save the day. She dies as victory is won, her honour and her reputation both restored.
The play reflects the new nationalism and militarism of the budding nineteenth century, and also the Kantian ideal of the need to subject emotion to moral principle.
The line "Mit der Dummheit k mpfen G tter selbst vergebens" (III, 6; Talbot) translates into English as "Against stupidity, the gods themselves contend in vain." This provided Isaac Asimov with the title of his novel The Gods Themselves.
This was the most performed (at least in Germany) of all Schiller's plays down to the Great War. In modern post-war Germany, its militarism is an embarrassment, but the dramatic power of the last two acts keeps the play on the stage.
Output: How does Joan feel about sparing the English knight?
The play loosely follows the life of Joan of Arc. It contains a prologue introducing the important characters, followed by five acts. Each dramatizes a significant event in Joan's life. Down into Act IV the play departs from history in only secondary details (e.g. by making Joan kill people in battle, and by shifting the reconciliation between the Armagnacs and the Burgundians from 1435 to 1430). Thereafter, however, the plot is entirely free. Joan is about to kill an English knight when, on removing his helmet, she at once falls in love with him, and spares him. Blaming herself for what she regards as a betrayal of her mission, then, when at Reims she is publicly accused of sorcery, she refuses to defend herself, is assumed to be guilty, and dismissed from the French court and army. Captured by the English, she witnesses from her prison cell a battle in which the French are being decisively defeated, breaks her bonds, and dashes out to save the day. She dies as victory is won, her honour and her reputation both restored.
The play reflects the new nationalism and militarism of the budding nineteenth century, and also the Kantian ideal of the need to subject emotion to moral principle.
The line "Mit der Dummheit k mpfen G tter selbst vergebens" (III, 6; Talbot) translates into English as "Against stupidity, the gods themselves contend in vain." This provided Isaac Asimov with the title of his novel The Gods Themselves.
This was the most performed (at least in Germany) of all Schiller's plays down to the Great War. In modern post-war Germany, its militarism is an embarrassment, but the dramatic power of the last two acts keeps the play on the stage.
Output: Whose life is the play based on?
The play loosely follows the life of Joan of Arc. It contains a prologue introducing the important characters, followed by five acts. Each dramatizes a significant event in Joan's life. Down into Act IV the play departs from history in only secondary details (e.g. by making Joan kill people in battle, and by shifting the reconciliation between the Armagnacs and the Burgundians from 1435 to 1430). Thereafter, however, the plot is entirely free. Joan is about to kill an English knight when, on removing his helmet, she at once falls in love with him, and spares him. Blaming herself for what she regards as a betrayal of her mission, then, when at Reims she is publicly accused of sorcery, she refuses to defend herself, is assumed to be guilty, and dismissed from the French court and army. Captured by the English, she witnesses from her prison cell a battle in which the French are being decisively defeated, breaks her bonds, and dashes out to save the day. She dies as victory is won, her honour and her reputation both restored.
The play reflects the new nationalism and militarism of the budding nineteenth century, and also the Kantian ideal of the need to subject emotion to moral principle.
The line "Mit der Dummheit k mpfen G tter selbst vergebens" (III, 6; Talbot) translates into English as "Against stupidity, the gods themselves contend in vain." This provided Isaac Asimov with the title of his novel The Gods Themselves.
This was the most performed (at least in Germany) of all Schiller's plays down to the Great War. In modern post-war Germany, its militarism is an embarrassment, but the dramatic power of the last two acts keeps the play on the stage.
Output: What does the Joan of Arc see from her prison cell?
The play loosely follows the life of Joan of Arc. It contains a prologue introducing the important characters, followed by five acts. Each dramatizes a significant event in Joan's life. Down into Act IV the play departs from history in only secondary details (e.g. by making Joan kill people in battle, and by shifting the reconciliation between the Armagnacs and the Burgundians from 1435 to 1430). Thereafter, however, the plot is entirely free. Joan is about to kill an English knight when, on removing his helmet, she at once falls in love with him, and spares him. Blaming herself for what she regards as a betrayal of her mission, then, when at Reims she is publicly accused of sorcery, she refuses to defend herself, is assumed to be guilty, and dismissed from the French court and army. Captured by the English, she witnesses from her prison cell a battle in which the French are being decisively defeated, breaks her bonds, and dashes out to save the day. She dies as victory is won, her honour and her reputation both restored.
The play reflects the new nationalism and militarism of the budding nineteenth century, and also the Kantian ideal of the need to subject emotion to moral principle.
The line "Mit der Dummheit k mpfen G tter selbst vergebens" (III, 6; Talbot) translates into English as "Against stupidity, the gods themselves contend in vain." This provided Isaac Asimov with the title of his novel The Gods Themselves.
This was the most performed (at least in Germany) of all Schiller's plays down to the Great War. In modern post-war Germany, its militarism is an embarrassment, but the dramatic power of the last two acts keeps the play on the stage.
Output: Which two groups reconcile?
The play loosely follows the life of Joan of Arc. It contains a prologue introducing the important characters, followed by five acts. Each dramatizes a significant event in Joan's life. Down into Act IV the play departs from history in only secondary details (e.g. by making Joan kill people in battle, and by shifting the reconciliation between the Armagnacs and the Burgundians from 1435 to 1430). Thereafter, however, the plot is entirely free. Joan is about to kill an English knight when, on removing his helmet, she at once falls in love with him, and spares him. Blaming herself for what she regards as a betrayal of her mission, then, when at Reims she is publicly accused of sorcery, she refuses to defend herself, is assumed to be guilty, and dismissed from the French court and army. Captured by the English, she witnesses from her prison cell a battle in which the French are being decisively defeated, breaks her bonds, and dashes out to save the day. She dies as victory is won, her honour and her reputation both restored.
The play reflects the new nationalism and militarism of the budding nineteenth century, and also the Kantian ideal of the need to subject emotion to moral principle.
The line "Mit der Dummheit k mpfen G tter selbst vergebens" (III, 6; Talbot) translates into English as "Against stupidity, the gods themselves contend in vain." This provided Isaac Asimov with the title of his novel The Gods Themselves.
This was the most performed (at least in Germany) of all Schiller's plays down to the Great War. In modern post-war Germany, its militarism is an embarrassment, but the dramatic power of the last two acts keeps the play on the stage.
Output: How many acts are in the play?
The play loosely follows the life of Joan of Arc. It contains a prologue introducing the important characters, followed by five acts. Each dramatizes a significant event in Joan's life. Down into Act IV the play departs from history in only secondary details (e.g. by making Joan kill people in battle, and by shifting the reconciliation between the Armagnacs and the Burgundians from 1435 to 1430). Thereafter, however, the plot is entirely free. Joan is about to kill an English knight when, on removing his helmet, she at once falls in love with him, and spares him. Blaming herself for what she regards as a betrayal of her mission, then, when at Reims she is publicly accused of sorcery, she refuses to defend herself, is assumed to be guilty, and dismissed from the French court and army. Captured by the English, she witnesses from her prison cell a battle in which the French are being decisively defeated, breaks her bonds, and dashes out to save the day. She dies as victory is won, her honour and her reputation both restored.
The play reflects the new nationalism and militarism of the budding nineteenth century, and also the Kantian ideal of the need to subject emotion to moral principle.
The line "Mit der Dummheit k mpfen G tter selbst vergebens" (III, 6; Talbot) translates into English as "Against stupidity, the gods themselves contend in vain." This provided Isaac Asimov with the title of his novel The Gods Themselves.
This was the most performed (at least in Germany) of all Schiller's plays down to the Great War. In modern post-war Germany, its militarism is an embarrassment, but the dramatic power of the last two acts keeps the play on the stage.
Output: What happens to Joan in her last battle against the English army?
The play loosely follows the life of Joan of Arc. It contains a prologue introducing the important characters, followed by five acts. Each dramatizes a significant event in Joan's life. Down into Act IV the play departs from history in only secondary details (e.g. by making Joan kill people in battle, and by shifting the reconciliation between the Armagnacs and the Burgundians from 1435 to 1430). Thereafter, however, the plot is entirely free. Joan is about to kill an English knight when, on removing his helmet, she at once falls in love with him, and spares him. Blaming herself for what she regards as a betrayal of her mission, then, when at Reims she is publicly accused of sorcery, she refuses to defend herself, is assumed to be guilty, and dismissed from the French court and army. Captured by the English, she witnesses from her prison cell a battle in which the French are being decisively defeated, breaks her bonds, and dashes out to save the day. She dies as victory is won, her honour and her reputation both restored.
The play reflects the new nationalism and militarism of the budding nineteenth century, and also the Kantian ideal of the need to subject emotion to moral principle.
The line "Mit der Dummheit k mpfen G tter selbst vergebens" (III, 6; Talbot) translates into English as "Against stupidity, the gods themselves contend in vain." This provided Isaac Asimov with the title of his novel The Gods Themselves.
This was the most performed (at least in Germany) of all Schiller's plays down to the Great War. In modern post-war Germany, its militarism is an embarrassment, but the dramatic power of the last two acts keeps the play on the stage.
Output: What is Joan of Arc accused of?