PDF Deep Learning Vol 2 From Basics to Practice Andrew Glassner download
PDF Deep Learning Vol 2 From Basics to Practice Andrew Glassner download
com
https://textbookfull.com/product/deep-learning-vol-2-from-
basics-to-practice-andrew-glassner/
OR CLICK BUTTON
DOWNLOAD NOW
https://textbookfull.com/product/deep-learning-vol-1-from-basics-to-
practice-andrew-glassner/
textboxfull.com
https://textbookfull.com/product/deep-learning-vol-1-from-basics-to-
practice-andrew-glassner-2/
textboxfull.com
https://textbookfull.com/product/programming-machine-learning-from-
coding-to-deep-learning-1st-edition-paolo-perrotta/
textboxfull.com
https://textbookfull.com/product/from-deep-learning-to-rational-
machines-converted-cameron-j-buckner/
textboxfull.com
From Deep Learning to Rational Machines 1st Edition
Cameron J. Buckner
https://textbookfull.com/product/from-deep-learning-to-rational-
machines-1st-edition-cameron-j-buckner/
textboxfull.com
https://textbookfull.com/product/deep-learning-applications-
volume-2-m-arif-wani/
textboxfull.com
https://textbookfull.com/product/covid-19-from-basics-to-clinical-
practice-1st-edition-wenhong-zhang/
textboxfull.com
https://textbookfull.com/product/introduction-to-deep-learning-from-
logical-calculus-to-artificial-intelligence-1st-edition-sandro-skansi/
textboxfull.com
https://textbookfull.com/product/processing-for-visual-artists-how-to-
create-expressive-images-and-interactive-art-1st-edition-andrew-
glassner/
textboxfull.com
Volume 2
DEEP LEARNING:
From Basics
to Practice
Andrew Glassner
Deep Learning:
From Basics to Practice
Volume 2
Copyright (c) 2018 by Andrew Glassner
www.glassner.com / @AndrewGlassner
All rights reserved. No part of this book, except as noted below, may be reproduced,
stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, without
the prior written permission of the author, except in the case of brief quotations
embedded in critical articles or reviews.
The above reservation of rights does not apply to the program files associated with
this book (available on GitHub), or to the images and figures (also available on
GitHub), which are released under the MIT license. Any images or figures that are
not original to the author retain their original copyrights and protections, as noted
in the book and on the web pages where the images are provided.
All software in this book, or in its associated repositories, is provided “as is,” with-
out warranty of any kind, express or implied, including but not limited to the
warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular pupose, and noninfringe-
ment. In no event shall the authors or copyright holders be liable for any claim,
damages or other liability, whether in an action of contract, tort, or otherwise,
arising from, out of or in connection with the software or the use or other dealings
in the software.
Contact: [email protected]
For Niko,
who’s always there
with a smile
and a wag.
Contents of Both Volumes
Volume 1
Preface..................................................................... i
Chapter 1: An Introduction.................................... 1
1.1 Why This Chapter Is Here................................ 3
1.1.1 Extracting Meaning from Data............................. 4
1.1.2 Expert Systems...................................................... 6
1.5 Generators......................................................... 32
1.6 Reinforcement Learning.................................. 34
1.7 Deep Learning................................................... 37
1.8 What’s Coming Next........................................ 43
References............................................................... 44
Image credits.................................................................. 45
Chapter 2: Randomness and Basic Statistics...... 46
2.1 Why This Chapter Is Here................................ 48
2.2 Random Variables............................................ 49
2.2.1 Random Numbers in Practice............................. 57
2.4 Dependence..................................................... 70
2.4.1 i.i.d. Variables......................................................... 71
2.6 Bootstrapping.................................................. 76
2.7 High-Dimensional Spaces............................... 82
2.8 Covariance and Correlation............................ 85
2.8.1 Covariance............................................................. 86
2.8.2 Correlation............................................................ 88
References............................................................... 307
Chapter 8: Training and Testing............................ 309
8.1 Why This Chapter Is Here............................... 311
8.2 Training............................................................. 312
8.2.1 Testing the Performance..................................... 314
References............................................................... 670
Chapter 17: Activation Functions.......................... 672
17.1 Why This Chapter Is Here............................... 674
17.2 What Activation Functions Do...................... 674
17.2.1 The Form of Activation Functions..................... 679
References............................................................... 802
Chapter 19: Optimizers.......................................... 805
19.1 Why This Chapter Is Here.............................. 807
19.2 Error as Geometry.......................................... 807
19.2.1 Minima, Maxima, Plateaus, and Saddles........... 808
19.2.2 Error as A 2D Curve............................................ 814
Volume 2
Chapter 20: Deep Learning................................... 872
20.1 Why This Chapter Is Here............................. 874
20.2 Deep Learning Overview.............................. 874
20.2.1 Tensors................................................................. 878
References............................................................... 1205
Image Credits.................................................................. 1208
References............................................................... 1378
Image Credits.................................................................. 1379
Chapter 25: Autoencoders..................................... 1380
25.1 Why This Chapter Is Here.............................. 1382
25.2 Introduction................................................... 1383
25.2.1 Lossless and Lossy Encoding............................. 1384
25.2.2 Domain Encoding............................................... 1386
25.2.3 Blending Representations................................. 1388
References............................................................... 1600
Chapter 28: Creative Applications........................ 1603
28.1 Why This Chapter Is Here............................. 1605
28.2 Visualizing Filters.......................................... 1605
28.2.1 Picking A Network.............................................. 1605
28.2.2 Visualizing One Filter........................................ 1607
28.2.3 Visualizing One Layer........................................ 1610
Welcome!
• Understand new papers and ideas, and put them into practice.
ii
Exploring the Variety of Random
Documents with Different Content
the things in them which seem to me most interesting are not quite
those which struck M. Rigault.
419. This is referred to, in the extract from Leone Allacci prefixed
to the 1646 ed. of Tassoni, as libellus Patavii editus. Tassoni seems
to have replied under a pseudonym and pretty savagely (magis
aculeatis dentibus).
420. Eight volumes, in 16 parts, of a not small quarto (Venice,
1643). This is one of the many books for the opportunity of studying
which, without burdening shelves and lightening purse, I am
indebted to the Library of the Faculty of Advocates.
421. Venice, 1612-13.
422. See Professors Gayley and Scott’s invaluable book so often
cited, p. 447, a passage based on Blankenburg’s older Zusätze (3
vols., Leipsic, 1796-98).
423. Venice, 1613.
424. Blankenburg is the sinner here.
425. Padua, 1681, pp. 1025-1088.
426. Henry Cary, Earl of Monmouth, translated the book in 1656.
427. Spain can boast, however, perhaps the very best History of
its criticism as a whole that any European language has—if not as
yet the only good one—in the Historia de las Ideas Estéticas en
España of Don Marcelino Menéndez y Pelayo (Ed. 2, 9 vols.,
Madrid, 1890-1896). This is fortunate for me, inasmuch as I do not
pretend to any extensive familiarity with Spanish literature beyond
the early poets, and indeed do not read the language with very great
facility. Besides Señor Menéndez I have relied chiefly on the texts
and comments recently furnished (v. inf.) by M. Morel-Fatio (who will,
I hope, continue in so good a road), on Ticknor, on the short but
valuable notices of this period in Mr Spingarn, op. cit., on those in my
friend Mr Hannay’s The Later Renaissance (Edinburgh and London,
1898), and on Mr James Fitzmaurice Kelly’s History of Spanish
Literature (London, 1898). I am particularly obliged to Mr Kelly for a
copy of the recent (undated) Spanish translation of his book, with a
few corrections, and a preface by Señor Menéndez himself. The
Spanish critic combines, with a just praise of the book, a mild
remonstrance as to the small space which Mr Fitzmaurice Kelly has
given to this very critical subject—a fact in which I own I myself had
felt some comfort. The silence of the specialist is the shield of the
expatiator. I have not failed, wherever I could, to verify all the critical
deliverances in the text, and examine almost all, if not all, the books
mentioned; but I do not know the circumference of them as I do
elsewhere. And as I began this History on the principle of going to
the sources, I think myself bound to warn the reader of any case in
which I have been obliged to modify that principle.
428. This was written before M. Morel-Fatio had expressed the
same view in his Les Défenseurs de la Comedia (Bulletin
Hispanique, ubi cit. inf.) See also on the point Mr Ker’s Essays of
Dryden, i. lxvi, and the references in his index to Dryden’s mention of
Spanish plays. Of course the main interest of the matter lies in the
much stronger resemblances that exist between the great English
and Spanish dramas than between any other two national branches
of the European theatre.
429. They say now that he was not only not (as used to be said)
the premier and only Marquis of Spain, but not a Marquis at all. Non
moror: non sum invidus—especially as the next monographer will
probably restore the Marquisate.
430. I have duly looked this up in what appears to be the only
accessible place (a place valuable for other documents), the
Orígenes de La Lengua Española, Madrid, 1737, of Mayáns y
Siscar. It is merely a tissue of troubadours’ names, scholastic
citations, and minute details of pronunciation and versification. Señor
Menéndez has reprinted part of it in the Appendix to his second
volume.
431. Poesias Castellanas anteriores al siglo xv. (Paris, 1842) pp.
13-17.
432. Quem nova concepit olla servabit odorem. It may be
observed that, on the principles of Low Latin scansion from
Commodian downwards, the first four words will do well enough.
433. I have used the somewhat later Grenville copy in the British
Museum Salamanca, 1509, fol.; and Señor Menéndez' reprint in the
Appendix to his second volume, which also contains one or two
other early documents.
434. The plural was used in the version of Mayans y Siscar
(Origenes, v. supra), which was long the only one accessible. In
1860 a better text appeared at Madrid with the singular, which
Ticknor and Mr Kelly approve. For any one who professes no
Spanish scholarship to set himself against these authorities may
seem absurd. But in the book itself sub finem the author writes
“habiendo considerado estas tres lenguas,” and the changes are
rung on Latin, Tuscan, and Spanish throughout.
435. After a conversation with Navagero which he has reported,
and which is, in its way, also a critical document.
436. Señor Menéndez refers to two Poetics anterior to Rengifo,
neither of which I have seen. The first, by Miguel Sanchez de Lima
(sometimes called de Viana), Alcala, 1580, has a slight interest in
the wording of its title, “El Arte Poética en romance castillano.” The
second—which from its date (1593) would seem to be a little later
than Rengifo, though the historian mentions it first—is Hierónymo de
Mondragon’s Arte para componer en metro castillano (Saragossa,
1593).
437. The above paragraph was written from notes taken while
reading Rengifo at the British Museum. In subsequently reading
Señor Menéndez on him I was surprised to find the learned historian
protesting against the Labyrinth, and other such things, as having
been foisted in cir. 1700-1720, and referring to the editions of 1592
and 1606 as alone genuine. But the British Museum copy is that of
1606! Let it by us even be said to Rengifo’s credit that, like Sidney,
he felt the charm of old romance. See M. y P., p. 320.
438. “The inexorable Cascales,” as Señor Menéndez calls him in a
passage which I had not read when I wrote the text. Of Cascales, as
of Pinciano (v. infra), the Señor thinks far more highly than I do. Both
seem to me (though Cascales more than Pinciano) to be simply
uncompromising Aristotelians who borrowed from the Italians; but,
like most borrowers and imitators, hardened and emphasised what
they borrowed. Both were forced to allow little “easements” in regard
to the drama; but only such as are consistent with Aristotle’s text,
though not with some glosses on him. And Pinciano simply
translates the Aristotelian definition of tragedy, while Cascales,
doubtless with reference to the different heresies of Castelvetro and
Giraldi, is quite Athanasian in his doctrine that poetic verities are
absolutely unchangeable, and independent of custom and time.
439. The book appeared in 1616; but I have had to use the reprint
of 1779. I have not seen Mesa’s Compendio de la Poética (Madrid,
1607) or Carillo’s Libro de Erudicion poética.
440. Madrid, 1596.
441. The Filosofía Antigua is extremely rare, and does not appear
to be in the British Museum either under “Pinciano” or under Lopez,
his real name. Fortunately there is a recent reprint (Valladolid, 1894),
ed. by Professor Don Pedro Muñoz Peña, which I duly possess. It
may be observed that bibliographers and librarians are particularly
hard on the laity in the Spanish department. It is surely needless to
make one hunt in vain for an author of world-wide reputation under
his world-name till one runs him to earth as Gómez de Quevedo [y]
Villegas.
442. Señor Peña, himself a professor (catedrático) of Valladolid in
Rhetoric and Poetry, explains that this surname was taken by
distinguished alumni of that University, and derived from the Roman
city (Pincia) supposed to have existed on the site. Few definite dates
or facts seem to be known about Alfonso Lopez, except that he was
physician to Mary of Austria, daughter of Charles V. and widow of
Maximilian II. during her life at Madrid from 1576 to 1603, and that
he wrote, besides the Filosofía and other things, a poem on Pelayo,
languide nec eleganter, one regrets to hear.
443. As where Fadrique substitutes, for the stately old image of
the honey on the edge of a bitter cup, the familiar come quien dora
una píldora, “as one who gilds a pill,” ed. cit., p. 120.
444. Ejemplar Poético, first printed, and, I think, still only to be
found, in the Parnaso Español, Madrid, 1774, vol. viii.
445. See Spingarn, p. 146, who gives the passage.
446. The Later Renaissance, p. 39.
447. Cf. Spingarn, p. 233.
448. (With a much longer title), Medina del Campo, 1602. The
quaint title is connected with a quainter fancy, that the poet is noble
as such—a “Knight of the Swan.” Señor Menéndez makes some use
of Carvallo, but admits that he is pedagogo adocenado, “a common
dominie.”
449. Nueva Idea de la Tragedia Antigua, &c. Madrid, 1633.
450. La misma lobreguez y el mismo desconsuelo, M. y P., iii. 364.
451. In the passage quoted by M. y P., iii. 366, 367.
452. Madrid, 1624. Noted by Señor Menéndez (who has given the
whole passage, iii. 457-60) as a specially rare book. Fortunately the
British Museum, according to a wise habit of its own in such cases
(cf. Capriano), has two copies, and M. Morel-Fatio has included the
piece which concerns us in an invaluable collection (also including
Lope’s Arte Nuevo and other things) of Spanish critical documents,
which he is issuing in the Bulletin Hispanique of the Faculty of
Letters of Bordeaux, and republishing separately (Paris, Fontemoing;
Bordeaux, Feret, 1901-1902). The man who gives a text attains merit
which mere commentators and historians can never hope to have
imputed to them.
453. Also reprinted by M. Morel-Fatio in the issue noticed above.
454. Los casos de la honra son mejores, Porque mueven con
fuerça a toda gente—A.N., 327, 328. At least one of Lope’s
innumerable works, the Laurel de Apolo, written late in his life
(1630), is busied with the poets of his time in the fashion of Caporali
and Cervantes, but, it would seem, in a spirit of wholly uncritical
panegyric.
455. V. sup., pp. 49, 50 note. It is fair to say that Lope quotes
Robortello.
456. Omnes dilaberentur. Señor Menéndez (iii. 444) gives all the
important parts, both in Latin and Spanish. R. de[l] Turia, infra, has
been reprinted, but the marrow of him also will be found in the
Historia, as well as much else: for instance, an interesting Invectiva y
Apologia, by Francesco de la Barreda in 1622, which is dignified by
the words: “There was no greater dramatic-poetic written in the
seventeenth century”—a large statement. But Barreda is certainly a
staunch anti-Unitarian, and has well reached the important doctrine
that “Art is merely a careful observation of classified [graduados]
examples.” The whole dispute, in which the more or less great
names of the Argensolas, Artieda, Cristóbal de Mesa, and others,
figure, together with the subsequent one on culteranism, will be
found exhaustively treated in the tenth chapter of the Historia, and
more summarily, but still usefully, in Ticknor. Since most of the text
was written M. Morel-Fatio, in his Défenseurs de la Comedia (v. sup.,
p. 343), has subjoined Turia to Tirso, and a certain Carlos Boyl to
both, adding a notice of the Frenchman Ogier (v. sup., pp. 256, 257),
who is already familiar to readers of these pages. Boyl, one of the
Valencian group above referred to, wrote in “romance” form rules of
the comedia nueva.
457. Let it be remembered that the curious passage on which
Pope dwells (Ess. Crit., 267 sq.) is not Cervantic, but from the
spurious and intrusive work of the mysterious Avellaneda.
458. Enthusiastically Englished, with much apparatus, by the late
James Y. Gibson (London, 1883). It is closely modelled on the
Viaggio di Parnasso of Cesare Caporali (1531-1601).
459. Or of their Spanish followers, such as Pinciano and Cascales.
This opinion, formed independently from reading of Don Quixote,
agrees with one of much more importance, that of Señor Menéndez
himself. Nay, Mr Fitzmaurice Kelly (op. cit., p. 237) roundly
pronounces Cervantes “the least critical of men.”
460. In his Works. Bibl. de Ribadeneyra.
461. In his Works. 2 vols., Barcelona, 1748.
462. Later Renaissance, p. 172.
463. Hist. Spanish Lit., p. 340.
464. I am very well aware that culteranismo and conceptismo are
perhaps not identical, and have been asserted to be quite different.
But both alike belong to the “better-bread-than-is-made-of-wheat”
division of writing.
CHAPTER III.
It is not necessary to add much to what has been said in the first
chapter of the last Book on the subject of Erasmus, in order to
indicate the reasons why the growth of criticism in Germany, High
and Low,[465] was far more tardy, and for a long time far scantier, than
even in England; and why, when it came, it displayed a one-eyed
character which is not visible in any other of the great European
The hindmost countries.[466] Want of unity, religious and political
of all. troubles, Grobianism and its opposite or companion
Pedantry—all had to do with this; but the principal hindrance was the
non-existence of any considerable German vernacular literature, and
the consequent inveteracy of the habit of writing in Latin. So long as
this lasted the Germans and Dutch might be and were
commentators, scholars, grammarians—but they could hardly be
critics, because they still lacked the comparative stimulus. And it is
not a little noteworthy that the earlier development of Criticism in the
Low Countries as compared with Germany, during our present
period, at least coincided with a greater development of Dutch
vernacular literature, though this is a matter which lies out of our
direct route.
There may easily be differences of opinion as to the persons, not
mere Humanists, who shall be selected as representing the
beginning of German criticism in modern times, in so far at least as
Origins. the section of Poetics is concerned. The choice may
lie between the famous Johann Sturm, who touches
on literary matters in his letters, who wrote on Rhetoric, and whose
pupil, late in his life, drew up a commentary on the Epistle to the
Pisos in 1576; Georgius Fabricius, of Chemnitz, the first form of
whose De Re Poetica appeared in 1565; and Jacobus Pontanus,
whose real name was Spanmüller, whose book on the subject was
published thirty years later, but who, as he was then a man of over
fifty, and had long been a professor, had probably dealt with the
subject, if only in lectures, much earlier.[467]
Sturm’s interests were more in pædagogy than in poetry, and he
does not rank high as a critic: though there is no doubt that he
Sturm. helped to spread devotion to books. It is not in his
favour that, in the teeth of both external and internal
evidence, he fights[468] for the name De Arte Poetica, on the special
ground that the work of Horace is an Ars Perfecta (which, put its
merits as high as you please, it most certainly is not), and that it has
all the six parts of poetry—fable, character, dianoia, lexis, melopœia,
and “sight.” For the rest he has few general remarks, and is almost
wholly commentatorial. His Rhetorical writing yields little really
critical: nor in his Letters have I yet found half so much criticism as is
extant in that single letter of Ascham to him, which has been noticed
above.[469]
The other two were both men of very wide influence as teachers of
Poetics: and both underwent the process—complimentary but
disfiguring, and specially usual in the late sixteenth and seventeenth
centuries—of having their work watered out, or boiled down, by
Fabricius. others. I do not know, and I have not considered it
tanti to spend much time or labour in the attempt to
discover, the exact process by which the small four books of the first
edition of Fabricius’ De Re Poetica[470] became the fat volume of
seven, which presents itself under the same title thirty years later.[471]
Version A. It seemed better to give this time and labour to the
reading of the books themselves. Version A (as we
may call that of 1565) is an early example of the kind of gradus
which was particularly popular among the northern nations, though,
as we have seen from the work of Mazzone da Miglionico,[472] it was
by no means unknown in Italy. In his first book Fabricius discusses
quantity, metre, and diction in general, with plentiful examples. Book
II. is an elaborate table of locutions from the Latin poets, listed under
heads as thus:—
Amor tangit. Matrimonium
promittere.
” versat. ” ” inire.
” torquet. ” ” fallere.
” dat vulnus. ” ” odisse.
” mordet.
” torret.
Book III. provides the dull-witted versifier with store of clichés of the
same kind, but a little more elaborate; there being, for instance,
dozens of phrases for embracing. And IV. is a sort of common place-
book of short copies of verses on everything in Heaven and Earth.
Version B (which is dated long after Fabricius’ death in 1571) is
Version B. not only much enlarged but differently arranged.
Book I. deals as before with Quantity and Feet;
Book II. with the subject of A, Book III.; and the rest follow the same
schemes,—III. B with tags on Ages, Seasons, Heavenly Bodies, &c.;
IV. with epithets suitable to proper names; V. with ditto to common;
VI. with a pot-pourri of poetical faults and beauties, &c.; while VII.
gives a sort of appendix on prosody and diction generally.
There is no need to say much on the inevitable critical result, the
obvious critical value or valuelessness, of this. There is in A a
reference to Scaliger’s Poetic, which had appeared a little before. As
a matter of fact Scaliger and Fabricius between them provided the
average late sixteenth-century man—sometimes even when he was
a professed critic or poet, constantly when he was merely a person
of ordinary culture—with a sort of joint poetical Thesaurus,—Scaliger
doing the historical, critical, and (of its kind) philosophical business
for him, and Fabricius keeping a general marine-store of materials,
with precepts for their use.
The Institutiones Poeticæ of Spanmüller [Pontanus] appeared first
Jac. in 1594. Its author is quoted, among other prophets
Pontanus. of criticism, by the Spaniard Juan de La Cueva a
dozen years later, and, independently of its original form, the book
acquired, early in the seventeenth century, a large currency by being
arranged (concinnata) in the Sacrarum Profanarumque Phraseum
Thesaurus of J. Buehler,[473] where it serves as theoretic handbook to
another Gradus. Indeed Pontanus’ own work has all the
characteristics of a decoction or abstract of Scaliger himself. And
once more the same reflection applies. It is impossible not to see
how powerful and (beyond mere school-work, in which they were no
doubt invaluable[474]) how maleficent must have been the influence of
such works on the critical temper of the generations influenced by
them. La Bruyère’s Tout est dit—an ironical fling in its author’s mouth
partly, no doubt, though perhaps not quite so even there—tended to
become matter of breviary. Everything had been said and done; all
the Kinds found out; all the phrases set down; all the poetry raised
from shaft and vein and seam. You simply rearranged it like a child’s
house of wooden bricks, according to patterns provided on the lid.
The “Causes of Corrupted Arts” into which Vives inquired, “The Lost
System of Speaking” which Sturm deplored, were all to be found,
and found sufficiently, in the Ancients.
The solid qualities of the German race have not commonly
distinguished themselves in pure criticism, and to this day Lessing
and Goethe are rather captains without companies, and with at best
a staff of Schlegels, and suchlike, for lieutenants and ancients.
Germans were, however, to do something better, in this century of
erudition, than the mere preparation of fourth-form handbooks.
Daniel Heinsius and Gerard Voss may be regarded with some
reason as the Jachin and the Boaz of the temple of seventeenth-
century Poetics. The De Tragœdiæ Constitutione of the first, which
appeared at Leyden in 1611,[475] is the succinctest and best argued
statement of the neo- and to a great extent pseudo-Aristotelian view
of Drama. The new Institutes of Oratory,[476] and the much later
Poetical Institutes[477] of the second, construct, with a great deal of
learning and a very considerable amount of good sense, an entire
neo-classical Rhetoric and Poetic. To both we must give some
attention.
The De Tragœdiæ Constitutione is beyond all doubt a very
Heinsius. The remarkable book. It is quite short; only some 250
De Tragœdiæ very small pages of very large print, so that there
Constitutione. are scarcely more than a hundred words in a page.
But Heinsius writes as one having authority; and we can read but
little of him before it becomes perfectly clear why that authority was
accepted, for the rest of the century at least, with more docility and
less cavil than that of almost any other critic. He takes the Poetics—
as many, indeed most men for more than half a century, had taken
them—for gospel. But he neither translates them on the one hand,
nor wanders in the wilderness of scrappy and desultory commentary
on the other. Not merely does he confine himself to that part of the
book which concerns his actual subject, but he renders this part in a
fashion which may best be described as a very rare, and very
masterly, kind of lecturing. He neither slavishly keeps nor prudishly
avoids the actual words of his author; his paraphrases are brief but
lucid; he adds to Aristotle what he thinks necessary[478] in the way of
illustrations from the Greek tragedians, citation from Horace,
examples (by no means always laudatory) from Seneca, and the
like; but in such a fashion as never to overload, or water down, the
milk of the Aristotelian word. That he always gives that milk quite
“sincere” we cannot say; he emphasises the “single revolution of the
sun” more than he has any right to do, though he does not do the
same for the still more pestilent and apocryphal Unity of Place. He
may sometimes, or often in the disputable places (as of “purgation”
and so forth), miss the full meaning of Aristotle according to the view
of some judges, or impute a wrong one according to others. But
nobody, let it be repeated, can read him impartially without seeing
that he has soaked himself with the spirit of his author, has equipped
himself pretty thoroughly with the literature of his subject, and, as a
result, is speaking, as we said, with authority. There is no clearer or
more workmanlike exposition of the neo-classic, and not too neo-
classic, dramatic ideal than his.
Heinsius, like his successor Hédelin in France, and like Hédelin’s
successors Rymer and Dennis in England, was rash enough to
forget that though a critic is (thank Heaven!) not bound to write good
Voss. poetry, he is bound not to publish bad. And he
ventured on a tragedy, Herodes Infanticida, and
other things which did not meet much quarter even from those who
agreed with him in critical principles. Voss was wiser, and confined
himself to the pure erudition and comment of which the two books
referred to above are far from being the worst examples. Indeed his
unboastful scholarship, his immense reading, and his untiring
industry would seem to have fitted him quite exceptionally for the
duty; and he has actually given us in these two books, or rather
collections of books, the completest Rhetoric and Poetic of modern,
if not of any, times. Only two things more were needed to put these
books in a place even more unique; but Nature refused the one to
Voss personally, and the other was a thing almost unreasonable to
require from a Dutch savant of the seventeenth century. The first
was positive critical genius; and the second was an impartial
appreciation of ancient and modern literature.
His Rhetoric. The Rhetoric, which the author put out in its first
form in 1606, revising and enlarging it for at least
thirty years, till it forms a quarto of a thousand closely printed pages,
has some seventy more of minute index, but lacks the Table of
Contents, or displayed syllabus of section headings, for which we
have so often had to be thankful in Italian work. Voss evidently had
the practice of the Roman Law constantly before him, and he thus
follows the method of the Latin treatises in a way which makes it for
the most part superfluous for us to follow him, though he has plenty
of modern instances and applications. From the Fourth Book
onwards, however, he deals with Elocution and Style, chiefly of
course by the way of Figures, yet, according to his lights, in the most
careful and exhaustive fashion. But what is at once noteworthy and
rather tell-tale is his unqualified admiration for the Scaligers,—father
and son. “That divine man,” “that man, ad unguem factus,” that
“emperor of the literary world,” that “prince of the senate of criticism”;
without some phrase of this kind he seems unable to name them.
And in fact the whole book is rather a huge commentatorial digest of
what they and others, from Aristotle downwards, have said than
anything more.
The Poetical Institutions are somewhat more original, and they
His Poetics. had much greater influence. The book consists
really of three separate works, a brief De Arte
Poetica of less than ninety pages, of which Grotius, in a
commendatory epigram prefixed to some editions, says—
And it is the peculiar glory of the Silesian poet that he not only sang
himself on the lyre of his country, but did his best to enable others to
do so. The spirit of genuine patriotism breathes in his dedication of
the booklet to the magistrates of his native town, Buntzlau; and that
of a modest scholarship (an adjective and substantive which make
such an agreeable couple that it is pity they should live so much
apart) in the opening of the book itself. He has not the least idea, he
says, that you can make a poet by rules and laws; nor has he any
intention of doing over again the work which Aristotle, Horace, Vida,
The Buch der and Scaliger have done. But he arrays himself (to
Deustchen speak ecclesiastically) in a “decent tippet” of the old
Poeterei. stuff about Linus and Orpheus, with the Strabo
passage all complete, and a train of citations as to the nobility of the
poet’s office and the like. He comes in his fourth chapter to business.
He actually quotes Walther von der Vogelweide; and I do not think
that he can be fairly charged with that ὕβρις towards the ancient
poetry of his country which too frequently marks others in other
countries. But he is evidently set on the work of Reform—of
substituting “smoothness of numbers” for the “wild sweetness” of the
folk-song. Wherein no doubt he was wrong. Not that way did the
counsels of perfection lie for the Higher Dutch; and they have always
had to come back to the woodnotes and the wood-Muses to find
poetic luck. But Opitz was entitled—was in his day almost bound—to
think differently. The interesting thing—much more interesting to us
than the details to which it led him, such as the patronage of the
Alexandrine, the alternation of masculine and feminine rhymes, &c.
—is the particular source to which he turned for inspiration and
guidance. He knew, as has been said, the Italian critics, at least
those in Latin, and he probably knew the Italian poets (he cites
Petrarch). But it is to France, and specially to Ronsard, that he fondly
turns. Now it need hardly be said that in 1624 the influence of the
Pléiade in its own country, though not quite dead, was moribund; the
correctness of Malherbe, on the one hand, was doing its best
deliberately to throttle it, and the Italianated and Spaniolated
extravagances which were fashionable were choking it in another
way. This is no doubt not the only instance of a literary influence
which is dead or dying in its own country showing full vitality in
another, but it is one of the most remarkable. For, beyond question,
the French influence—in successive forms, but still French—reigned
in Germany for some hundred and fifty years; and it was Opitz who
first brought it to bear.
His details, as has been said, are less interesting: yet they do not
lack interest. He begins by stickling for pure High German: and
certainly no one who, for his sins, has been condemned to read
much of late fifteenth- and early sixteenth-century German—one of
the ugliest and most mongrel speeches in history, and quite
astounding after the musical sweetness of the best
Mittelhochdeutsch—will owe him a grudge for this. He protests
against the mingle-mangle of foreign words which was flooding the
language, and even against the famous -iren by which, to the
present day to some extent, Germans give a sort of spurious
naturalisation to such foreigners. He would have limits set (though
he does not forbid it altogether) to that odd custom of declining
classical names in German speech, which is also maintained to
some extent, but which sometimes made a mere Macaronic of
sixteenth-century German. On the other hand, it is curious to find
him urging on Germans, who by right were, and by practice long
have been, among the busiest and most successful of word-
compounders, the sonderliche anmuthigkeit of compounds: and
actually quoting the French as, next the Greeks, the masters of such
things.[482] Of course the historical student, even if citations from
Ronsard were not on the same page, would know at once whence
this comes. Still, there still remains the oddity of alleging the
undoubtedly awkward and exotic-sounding chasse-nue, ébranle-
rocher, and irrite-mer as warrants and patterns for words like
wolkentreiber, felsenstürmer, and meeraufreitzer, which simply seem
to us natural-born, and to require no warranty but their own sound
and appearance.
But Opitz (of whom if any critic speaks disrespectfully, I fear that it
argues him uncritical) wrote not merely on the eve, but in the actual
stormy morning, of the Thirty Years’ War: and Germany had
something else to do for a long time besides listening to him. When
matters settled down again, the advice to attend to the French was
rather unfortunately “carried over” to a state of things in which
French influence was still less the influence for Germany. But this
imitation, whether right or wrong, found no important critical
expression, and it would be losing labour and space to devote either
to German criticism in the last half of the seventeenth century.
It is more remarkable that the real activity and accomplishment of
Dutch during the early part of the century did not lead to some
development of vernacular criticism. But to the best of my
information[483] it did not. The Dutch and the Germans, however, of
course still continued to write in Latin, to edit, to comment, to carry
on that division of critical work which, according to the laying out of
our subject, lies, except at particular seasons and for special ends,
beyond the scope of this book. Moreover, both Holland and some of
the German Free-towns, but especially the former country, became
the adopted, as they were almost the natural, homes of those
beginners of judicial criticism, who have been noticed in part at the
conclusion of the French chapter of this Book. Bayle’s Nouvelles de
la République de Lettres were Hollandish by domicile, as was the
Bibliothèque Universelle of Le Clerc, while at Leipsic the Acta
Eruditorum maintained the same principle of critical annals for nearly
a century. Bayle, as has been said before, was too much of a
partisan, and perhaps of a wit, for anything of his to have a judicial,
however much in some senses of the word it might have a critical,
character: but the less mercurial talents of Jean Le Clerc, which
have been characterised under the head of the Ana (v. sup., p. 276),
were very well suited to the conduct of a critical record.
The middle third, if not the whole first half, of the seventeenth
century in England was too much occupied with civil and religious
broils to devote attention to such a subject literary criticism. Between
Dead water in the probable date of Jonson’s Timber (1625-37) and
English the certain one of Dryden’s Essay of Dramatic
Criticism. Poesy (1668) we have practically nothing
substantive save the interesting prefatory matter to Gondibert
Milton (1650). Milton, the greatest man of letters wholly of
the time, must indeed during this time have
conceived, or at least matured, that cross-grained prejudice against
rhyme, which is more surprising in him than even in Campion, and
which was itself even more open to Daniel’s strictures. For not only
is Milton himself in his own practice a greater and more triumphant
vindicator of rhyme than Campion, but Daniel’s strongest and
soundest argument, “Why condemn this thing in order to establish
Welcome to our website – the ideal destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. With a mission to inspire endlessly, we offer a
vast collection of books, ranging from classic literary works to
specialized publications, self-development books, and children's
literature. Each book is a new journey of discovery, expanding
knowledge and enriching the soul of the reade
Our website is not just a platform for buying books, but a bridge
connecting readers to the timeless values of culture and wisdom. With
an elegant, user-friendly interface and an intelligent search system,
we are committed to providing a quick and convenient shopping
experience. Additionally, our special promotions and home delivery
services ensure that you save time and fully enjoy the joy of reading.
textbookfull.com