New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1896-08-02
PHILOSOPHY MADE LITERATURE.


In this matter and particularly in the grace
full Of learning no marks epoch in Ger
many, just as Montaigne marked similar
epoch long ago in France. No human being is
educated who has not read Montaignes essays
But who would think of reading them for their
frdecisive philosophy? "Que sails je?" is so
universal doubt that it would be waste of
time TO find what il stood for in the sixteenth
century Montaigne is read now for his grace
Of learning for his gift Of expression. for his de-
lichtrrl humanity. Yet his learning not far
reaching The story is familiar of one Of the
Scalgers. who visiting him, exclaimed, Il
have written more books than you have In your
whole library" Take away what Montaigne
owes to Putarch and Ovid and the remainder
would present a sorry spectacle. 1t Is here
that Schopenhauer has the advantage of his
great prototype. His reading was vast and
varied The defects in his learning are just
those which marked a man who was a philoso-
pher by nature and not by training. discursive
reader from taste and inclination. Won Hart
mann, his disciple who refuses the name or
disciple, iG much better acquainted say, with
Aristotle than Schopenhauer Is. Some Of
Schopenhaucrs faings can be traced to the fact
that he was thoroughly familiar only with the
more imaginative side of Greek philosophy. Few
men were ever better read in Plato than Schop-
enhauer He knew all that was to be known
in the Europe of his time about the religions
and PHILOSOPHERS of the Orient. He was deeply
versed In Spnoza and Kant and the modern
philosophers in general But these would not
have made him writer with style worthy OF
being read for ages to come. on such pabulum
he might have become another HeSel, whose
obscurity as a thinker is always illustrated by
of CT, ID pfc
understood him. and even that one did not un-
derstand; while his literary merits are satirized
In the story of the German who when asked
by an Engshman how his books would trans
late, exclaimed lone writer may be this and
another may be that but Hegel-Ach Gott,
B.. He not merely a German classical
scholar but he was acquainted with the Ian
guages and lteratures of Spain, France, Italy
and England In reading his works it is i'm
possible to forecast the books and the authors
iron which he will draw his illustrations
Shakespeare and Calderon and Dante are only
less familiar to him than Goethe, because II
happened that he had Of Goethe the personal
knowledge that grew out Of friendllness and
companionship. In view of the wide range f
his literary sympathies. ii Is good introduc-
ton to the general study OF European ntera-
ture to read through everything that he has
written. Even where he hated he found some
thing to praise. Not Hegel spoke more
slightingly Of the Middle Ages than he. yet no
man ever paid juster Or more brilliant tribute
than he did in a line or two to the beauties OF
the rhymed Latin poetry Of the medaeval
period He loved literature and literary alu-
sion for their own sake. With them he so
tempered the harshness Of mere philosophic die
ton that he charmed the least philosophic OF
mortals II 1t were not for the rather Fictitious
earnestness the indiscriminate emphasis. the
dogma tic egotism of a man who lived too muca
alone you might suspect that he was. ike
Hume. only playing with the deep themes OF
metaphysics. Though throw out my specuia-
lions" said the delightful David, ito entertain
the learned and metaphysical world yet do
not think 50 differently from the rest Of the
world as you imagine" If this had only been
Schopenhauer's attitude toward his own
achievements he would have been simply perfect
as a philosophical essayst.