Search results

1

Mémoire et oubli dans L’An 2440 de Louis-Sébastien Mercier

100%

Szabolcs E.

Svět literatury – Časopis pro novodobé literatury (World of Literature – Journal for Modern Literatures)

|

2020

|

vol. XXX

|

issue Zvláštní číslo – Le monde de la littérature

51-60

EN

In Mercier’s futuristic novel published in 1771, the author’s alter ego wakes up one day as a sevenhundred-year-old man and he rediscovers the city of Paris in the company of a citizen of the 25th century. Memory and forgetting can be interpreted in different ways in the novel: on the one hand, we can see how the elderly man remembers his own time, what memories he keeps from the 18th century, and also how the people of this new Paris are kept in the memory of future generations. On the other hand, we will examine the author’s point of view, especially the influence of the philosophers of his time. During Mercier’s meditations on the tombs and ruins, it is mainly the impact of Diderot’s thoughts that dominates, and these passages show that the notions of memory and forgetting are closely related to those of imagination and dream.

2

Diderot et Le Neveu de Rameau, un je(u) de rôle à l’issue incertaine

100%

Lecimbre A.

Quêtes littéraires

|

2023

|

issue 13

38-47

EN

By requiring us to think the notion of play in his dramaturgical aspect, the main purpose of this paper is to shed light on the question of the individuality of the character of the Nephew in Rameau’s Nephew. The field of the theatre and performing arts is of great importance in Diderot’s texts. Therefore, in Rameau’s Nephew, through the dialogue between Him and Me, the question of the theatrical space and the structure of the text are coupled with a questioning of the “I” of the characters. We want to observe, in this paper, the way in which the theme of play in Rameau’s Nephew illuminates the theatrical space and the structure. The character of the Nephew is only an actor. He laughs at the Philosopher and subverts the materialist point of view, as much as philosophical practice.

FR

En dépliant les usages du terme de jeu dans leur dimension dramaturgique, l’objectif de cette contribution est d’éclairer la question de l ’individualité du personnage du Neveu dans Le Neveu de Rameau de Diderot. L’importance que l’écrivain accorde au genre théâtral éclaire d’un point de vue nouveau l’œuvre puisque, dans ce dialogue entre Lui et Moi, la question du décor et la structure du texte se doublent d’une interrogation sur le je des personnages. Le thème du jeu éclaire à la fois le décor dans lequel se déroule le dialogue et l’individualité du personnage du Neveu qui ne semble être, du début à la fin, qu’un comédien par essence. Force est alors de constater que ce dernier se joue du Philosophe et subvertit tout autant son point de vue matérialiste que sa pratique philosophique.

3

Was leistet die Kälte des Schauspielers bei LESSING und DIDEROT?

99%

Kaul S.

Convivium. Germanistisches Jahrbuch Polen

|

2019

31-46

PL

W artykule przedstawiona jest debata dotycząca zasad gry aktorskiej, prowadzona w XVIII w. Brali w niej udział m.in. DIDEROT i LESSING. Spór dotyczył pytania, czy aktor powinien przekazywać autentyczne emocje i identyfikować się z przedstawianą postacią czy też powinien grać w sposób zdystansowany i opanowany, bez stapiania się z rolą. DIDEROT podawał wiele argumentów na rzecz ,chłodnego’ aktora, natomiast LESSING był zwolennikiem połączenia ognia i chłodu. Teza artykułu dotyczy funkcji ,gorącej’ lub ,chłodnej’ gry: chłód służy w wypowiedziach LESSINGA oświeceniowemu Common Sense Moral. Jest to teoria bliska tezom Adama Smitha. DIDEROT natomiast broni chłodu w imię wartości estetycznych, służących poziomowi artystycznemu przedstawienia. Spojrzenie w pooświeceniową przyszłość wiąże wnioski z tez o chłodnych i gorących uczuciach ze współczesnymi teoriami o emocjach.

EN

This article presents the debate on theatre theory that arose in the 18th century and in which DIDEROT and LESSING participated. The conflict revolved around the question whether an actor should convey authentic emotions and identify with the character he/she plays or whether he/she should act in an unemotional and controlled way without becoming absorbed in the role. While DIDEROT delivers many arguments for “the cold actor”, LESSING pleads for a mix of “fire” and “coldness”. The thesis of this article is that LESSING’S “coldness” is justified by an Enlightenment common sense morality that can be seen as akin to Adam Smith’s ideas, while DIDEROT defends the “cold” way of acting in the name of aesthetic values which serve to assure a high artistic level of performance. The article looks at how some implications of these statements about “cold” and “hot” feelings are critically related to contemporary emotion theories.

DE

In diesem Beitrag geht es um eine schauspieltheoretische Debatte, die im 18. Jahrhundert aufgekommen ist und an der sich auch DIDEROT und LESSING beteiligt haben. Soll ein Schauspieler seine ganze Leidenschaft in eine Rolle legen und sein, was er darstellt, oder soll er distanziert und beherrscht die Rolle spielen, ohne darin aufzugehen? Während DIDEROT viele Gründe für den kalten Schauspieler ins Feld führt, plädiert LESSING für eine Mischung aus Feuer und Kälte. Die These dieses Beitrags ist, dass die Kälte bei LESSING im Dienste einer aufklärerischen Common Sense Moral steht, die in der Nähe zu Adam Smith gesehen werden kann, während DIDEROTS Verteidigung der Kälte ästhetisch begründet ist und allein der Kunstfertigkeit der Darstellung dienen soll. In einem Ausblick werden einige Implikationen dieser Statements über kalte und heiße Gefühle kritisch mit der Emotionstheorie der Gegenwart in Beziehung gesetzt.

4

Penser par soi-même ou la question du maître vue par les encyclopédistes et par Kant

80%

Le Ru V.

Quêtes littéraires

|

2019

|

issue 9

32-43

EN

How does the Encyclopedists’ watchword ‘to think for oneself’ relate to the question of education, which could be formulated as: does man need a master? As soon as the Encyclopedists ask the question, they propose a new way of thinking about the two meanings which can be given to the notion of master: dominus (“the lord”), and magister (“the teacher”). The lord has authority thanks to his status as a land owner or castle owner, the teacher is in a position of power by virtue of his knowledge and education. The Encyclopedists’ answer to the question concerning education will be compared to that given by Kant, and the meaning the Encyclopedists assign to the expression ‘to think for oneself’ will also be juxtaposed with Kant’s interpretation. In this way, the correlation between education and ‘thinking for oneself’ observed by both Kant and the Encyclopedists will be demonstrated.

FR

Comment le mot d’ordre des encyclopédistes de penser par soi-même se conjugue-t-il avec la question de l’éducation qu’on pourrait formuler ainsi : l’homme a-t-il besoin d’un maître ? Les encyclopédistes posent la question et aussitôt la reformulent selon les deux sens que l’on peut donner à la notion de maître. Le latin fournit deux termes qui recouvrent la notion de maître en français : dominus (celui qui possède les terres et qui domine les gens qui vivent sur ses terres : le seigneur) et magister (celui qui enseigne les connaissances et les règles : l’éducateur). Le dominus tient son autorité de ses titres de propriété, le magister de son savoir et de son éducation. Nous comparerons la solution que donnent les encyclopédistes à la question de l’éducation à celle que propose Kant, nous comparerons également la signification respective qu’ils donnent à l’exigence de penser par soi-même et nous montrerons que l’injonction de penser par soi-même est corrélée à celle de l’éducation aussi bien chez les encyclopédistes que chez Kant.

5

Wolter, Diderot, Marivaux, albo klasycyzm, sentymentalizm, rokoko w teatrze

80%

Dębowski M.

Pamiętnik Literacki

|

2021

|

vol. 112

|

issue 2

65-77

PL

W bodaj najbardziej znanej książce Teresy Kostkiewiczowej „Klasycyzm, sentymentalizm, rokoko”, dramatopisarstwo stanowi niewielką część przykładów, które ilustrują kształtowanie się i jakościowe zmiany funkcjonowania polskiej literatury w dobie oświecenia, spojrzenie teatrologiczne zaś, czyli los przedstawień klasycznych, sentymentalnych bądź rokokowych na scenie nie jest celem badaczki. Dlatego autor artykułu proponuje zwrócić uwagę na trzech dramatopisarzy, których sztuki, z jednej strony, były grane dla polskiej publiczności w teatrze stołecznym i na prowincji, a z drugiej – ich twórcy są do dzisiaj uznawani za reprezentantów trzech głównych, XVIII-wiecznych prądów literacko-artystycznych. Pozwala to na postawienie kilku nowych akcentów w rozważaniach na temat użyteczności pojęć, które stosujemy, klasyfikując ówczesną twórczość teatralną.

EN

In Teresa Kostkiewiczowa’s probably most recognised book “Klasycyzm, sentymentalizm, rokoko” (“Classicism, Sentimentalism, Rococo”) playwriting is illustrated by a small number of examples that picture the shaping and qualitative changes in the functioning of the Polish Enlightened literature, while a theatrological view, namely the fortune of the classical, sentimental or rococo performances, is not the purpose. As a result, the author of the article attempts to pay attention to the playwriters whose pieces, on the one hand, were staged for Polish audience in capital theatre and in the province, and, on the other hand, to the playwriters themselves who until this day are seen as the representatives of the three main 18th c. literary-artistic trends. Such an approach allows to place new accents in the considerations about the usability of the terms that we employ when classifying the then theatrical production.

6

The Philosophes’ Criticism of Religion and d’Holbach’s Non-Hedonistic Materialism

71%

Hämäläinen H.

Diametros

|

2017

|

issue 54

56-75

EN

Baron d’Holbach was a critic of established religion, or a philosophe, in late 18th-century France. His work is often perceived as less inventive than the work of other materialist philosophes, such as Helvétius and Diderot. However, I claim that d’Holbach makes an original, unjustly overlooked move in the criticism of religious moral teaching. According to the materialist philosophes, this teaching claims that true happiness is only possible in the afterlife. As an alternative, Helvétius and Diderot offer theories according to which the experience of pleasure constitutes happiness, the end of all human desire. In contemporary terms, these theories would represent psychological hedonism. But, as Diderot himself admits, they have a problem in accounting for why people seem to naturally regard some pleasures as preferable to others. I argue that in response to this challenge, instead of accepting the psychological hedonism of his fellow materialists, d’Holbach shows how one can abstain from reducing happiness to pleasure and yet remain a materialist.

Refine search results

2 Quêtes littéraires

1 Convivium. Germanistisches Jahrbuch Polen

1 Diametros

1 Pamiętnik Literacki

1 Svět literatury – Časopis pro novodobé literatury (World of Literature – Journal for Modern Literatures)

1 Dębowski M.

1 Hämäläinen H.

1 Kaul S.

1 Le Ru V.

1 Lecimbre A.

1 Szabolcs E.

1 2023

1 2021

1 2020