<i>De anatomische les</i>: Marsman’s ‘Poetics’ 1926 — with a Sidelong Glance at Coenen, Gorter, Emants, and the Movement of<i>Tachtig</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 1926, Hendrik Marsman published a sequence of essays under the title De anatomische les. In these, Marsman takes the intimate relationship between an intensely lived life and art as a given, and evaluates the work of, among others, Novalis, Büchner, Trakl, and Rilke, in light of it. In an Appendix, Marsman presents what might be called his poetic programme, stressing three main topics: the relation between life and art, a definition of the work of art, and finally the effect of art (poetry) on the reader. In the case of the effect of poetry, however, Marsman shifts into a discussion of lyric poetry as a symptom of individualism; this in turn leads to an assessment of contemporary poetry, with a look back at the Tachtigers. In that movement Marsman sees a positive side to the all-pervasive individualism of modern times, leading him eventually to change his poetic practice, moving from an at times shrill ‘expressionism’ or ‘vitalism’ to a symbolist organic style, whilst continuing his defence of poetry against those who would question art’s autonomy.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".