MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

<i>De anatomische les</i>: Marsman’s ‘Poetics’ 1926 — with a Sidelong Glance at Coenen, Gorter, Emants, and the Movement of<i>Tachtig</i>

2012· article· en· W2028213099 on OpenAlexaff
Augustinus P. Dierick

Bibliographic record

VenueDutch Crossing · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicNarrative Theory and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoetryPoeticsIndividualismVitalismMovement (music)ArtLiteratureRelation (database)Style (visual arts)PhilosophyAutonomyArt historyAestheticsLawMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.009
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.209 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDutch CrossingSame topicNarrative Theory and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207