subjects by which they are attracted. In the same way that, in
general, a large "reading world," or a regular public for a theatre,
or a solid community of devotees for each of the different species of
song (as for example, the religious song, the folk-song, the student's
song) is organized, so do important personalities call into being a
special following of admirers, such as the partisans of Hebbel, the
Wagnerians, and the adherents of Stefan George. But these narrow
circles are often much more intolerant of every effort on the part of
the master to depart from the program he has sworn to, than are
outsiders. The history of the German public, unlike that of the
English or French, is less a church-history than a sect-history.
Schiller alone succeeded in becoming the national poet of his
people--and he had his merits as well as his weaknesses to thank for
it. Lessing is the one who comes next to him, whereas Goethe really
reached the masses in only a few of his compositions. On the other
hand, he made a stronger impression upon, and gave more happiness to,
the intellectual classes than any of our poets since Klopstock. After
him, only poets of a decidedly esoteric character, such as Stefan
George or Friedrich Nietzsche, have had such a profound effect or one
so capable of stirring the remoter depths of the soul. Even with Jean
Paul the impression produced was more superficial. Latterly, however,
periodicals, lecture-courses and clubs have replaced the
"_caucus_"--which was formerly held by the most influential readers
and hearers of the literary fraternities. This change has gone so far
that the intimacy of the relations between a poet and his admirers,
which was still possible in the early days of Hauptmann, Hofmannsthal,
George, and Dehmel, now actually exists only for those poets who have
not attained any special renown, such as Alfred Mombert, or, perhaps,
we might also include Spitteler. An amalgamation of the different
groups, which in Germany are wont to prove their love for their patron