Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 4

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Nowy żar Kuźni bluźnierstw

100%
EN
The article discusses a collection of Karol Irzykowski’s aphorisms entitled Kuźnia bluźnierstw (The Forge of Blasphemy, 1911, printed as a book in 1913), its role against the trends of the times, especially Nietzsche’s philosophy and psychoanalysis, the importance of social rebellions, national uprisings and artistic revolutions (“blaspheming”, “bravado”, “pioneering”, audiacia civilis). In the subsequent part of the article, the author discusses the topicality of a critic’s theses in relation to the contemporary disputes over the content and the language of the argumentation. The author has placed pragmatism at the centre of the considerations, with special emphasis placed on intellectual and artistic deeds, antecedent awareness and its caricature i.e. usurpation. This is concisely put in the following aphorism: “Genuine faith feeds on lack of faith; it only lives because it is constantly restored”.
Pamiętnik Literacki
|
2014
|
vol. 105
|
issue 2
151-157
PL
Pytanie o podstawę Mickiewiczowskiej lektury epigramatów Angelusa Silesiusa (Johannesa Schefflera) ze zbioru "Cherubinowy wędrowiec (Cherubinischer Wandersmann)" było często stawiane, ale nie znajdowano wiążącej odpowiedzi. Wiadomo było, że Mickiewicz zainteresował się wrocławskim poetą w 1833 r. lub nieco wcześniej, może jeszcze zanim zamieszkał w Paryżu. W latach 1833–1836 powstawały inspirowane pismami mistycznymi Saint-Martina, Franza Baadera, Jakoba Böhme i Angelusa Silesiusa epigramaty, którym poeta nadał tytuł "Zdania i uwagi". Jako motto całości umieszczony został w rękopisie, jedyny tu w języku niemieckim, epigramat Angelusa: „Ruh ist das höchste Gut: und wäre Gott nicht ruh / Ich schlösse vor Ihm selbst mein’ Augen beide zu” (I 49), w zapisie różniącym się od tekstu Cherubinowego wędrowca z 1675 r. (wydanie ostatniej ręki), gdzie drugi wers ma postać: „Jch schliesse für Jhm selbst mein’ Augen beide zu”. Różnica ta stała się punktem wyjścia dalszych poszukiwań, polegających na przebadaniu mnożących się, począwszy od drugiej dekady XIX wieku, publikacji tekstów Angelusa Silesiusa, które mogły zwrócić uwagę polskiego poety. Pierwsze powstałe w tej koniunkturze całościowe wydanie "Cherubinowego wędrowca" wyszło w 1827 r. w Monachium. Analiza tekstu wykazała, że opierało się ono na ostatnim XVIII-wiecznym wznowieniu tego dzieła, z 1737 r., będącym adaptacją edycji Gottfrieda Arnolda (1701 i 1713), który przyjął za podstawę wydanie ostatniej ręki. W innej sytuacji znalazł się anonimowy edytor z 1829 r. (Sulzbach, Seidel’sche Buchhandlung): ten dysponował rzadkim egzemplarzem wiedeńskiej editio princeps (która zawierała pięć ksiąg spośród ostatecznych sześciu) oraz edycją Arnolda z 1701 r., a przy tym miał przygotowanie filologiczne, które pozwoliło mu z tych dwóch przekazów ułożyć bliską doskonałości całość. Tu właśnie, i tylko tu, znalazł się epigram I 49 w wersji przejętej przez Mickiewicza, można więc stwierdzić z całą pewnością, że tym wydaniem autor "Zdań i uwag" dysponował.
EN
The question about Mickiewicz’s reading of epigrams by Angelus Silesius (Johannes Scheffler) from the collection "Cherubinischer Wandersmann (The Cherubinic Pilgrim)" has many times been posed but no convincing answer has been supplied. It was known that Mickiewicz raised his interest in the Breslau poet in 1833 or even earlier, possibly before leaving for Paris. Between 1833–1836 he produced epigrams inspired by mystical writings by Saint-Martin, Franz Baader, Jakob Böhme and Angelus Silesius which the poet entitled "Zdania i uwagi (Thoughts and Remarks)". As a motto to the collection Mickiewicz used in his manuscript was the only in German epigram by Angelus: “Ruh ist das höchste Gut: und wäre Gott nicht ruh / Ich schlösse vor Ihm selbst mein’ Augen beide zu” (I 49), which is different from the 1675 copy of the last hand edition, where the second line is “Jch schliesse für Jhm selbst mein’ Augen beide zu.” The above disparity forms a starting point for further research consisting in analyses of the multiplied from the second decade of 19th c. editions of Silesius’ texts in which Mickiewicz might arose his interest. In those circumstances, the first complete edition of The "Cherubinic Pilgrim" was issued in 1827 in Munich. The analysis of the text revealed that its basis was the last 18th republication of the text (from 1737) which, in turn, was an adaptation of Gottfried Arnold’s edition (1701, 1713), the basis of which was last hand edition. The condition of an anonymous editor from 1829 – Sulzbach, Seidel’sche Buchhandlung – was different. He possessed a rare copy of a Vienna editio princeps (containing five of the ultimate six books) and Arnold’s 1701 edition and, qualified in philology, he prepared out of the two sources an almost ideal account. And it is here, and only here, that we find the epigram (I 49) in the version adopted by Mickiewicz, thus we can be certain that it was that copy that the author of "Thoughts and Remarks" possessed.
EN
From among around four hundred examples taken from the Bible, mythology and history, which in Sebastian Brant’s The Ship of Fools are designed to instruct and caution, more than twenty come from Ovid’s Metamorphoses. Brant does not make references to Ovid’s work and he mentions the poet only once, as the author of Ars amatoria (buler kunst), which brought Ovid nothing but misfortune.Most of them appear in Chapter XIII On Seduction (Von buolschaft) and single ones in Chapters: XXVI, LIII, LX, LXIV and LXVII. The references are allusive and abridged, they concern pathetic consequences of wicked or rash love, jealousy and hatred as well as self-loving and foolhardy imprudence. They stand as codes, which can not be deciphered without knowing the source and it implies that Brant either assumes the reader has the required knowledge or appeals to gain it. It is also possible that he refers to common at that time didactic modifications of Metamorphoses. Problematic and often tragic illustration of human fortunes in Ovid’s work is reduced in Brant’s satire to parenetic formula, which intrigues and is expressed with vivid and crude language. The most explicit example of dissonance between Brant’s and Ovid’s intention is a truly clown like character − Marsyas, who with obstinacy plays bagpipes, a clownish instrument, whereas in Metamorphoses he enraptured people playing his aulos and his death as martyr is mourned by not only nymphs and shepherds, but also by nature. The rights of the genre, in this case of moral satire, proved to be stronger than philosophical meaning of mythological message.
EN
Around our hundred examples rom the Bible, mythology and history in Sebastian Brants The Ship of Fools are designed to instruct and caution; more than twenty come rom Ovids Metamorphoses. Brant does not make reerences to Ovids work and he mentions the poet only once as the author of Ars amatoria, which brought Ovid nothing but misortune. Most of those references appear in Chapter XIII “On Seduction” (Von buolscha) and single ones in Chapters: XXVI, LIII, LX, LXIV and LXVII. Tey are abridged and coded allusions concerning the consequences of wicked or rash love, jealousy and hatred as well as self-loving and foolhardy imprudence. They cannot be deciphered without knowing the source. This implies that Brant either assumes the reader has sufficient knowledge or suggests they need to gain it. Te conventions of the genre, in this case of moral satire, proved to be stronger than the philosophical meaning of the mythological message.
PL
Unter den rund vierhundert Beispielen aus der Bibel, der Mythologie und Geschichte, die in Sebastian Brants Das Narrenschiff dem Unterricht und der Ermahnung dienen, stammen mehr als zwanzig aus Ovids Metamorphosen. Brant nimmt keinen direkten Bezug au Ovids Werk und erwähnt den Dichter nur einmal als den Autor der Ars amatoria (‚bůler kunst‘), die Ovid nichts als Unglück beschert habe. Die meisten Verweise au Ovid erscheinen im Kapitel XIII und einzelne in den Kapiteln XXVI, LIII, LX, LXIV und LXVII. Sie sind anspielend und verkürzt, sie betreen die beklagenswerten Folgen von sündhaer oder koposer Liebe, Eiersucht und Hass sowie selbstverliebter und törichter Unbesonnenheit. Sie stellen Codes dar, die sich nicht entschlüsseln lassen, ohne die Quelle zu kennen. Daraus lässt sich schlussolgern, dass Brant entweder davon ausgeht, dass der Leser über die erorderlichen Kenntnisse verügt, oder dass er ihn auordert, diese zu erlangen. Die Regeln des Genres, in diesem Fall der moralischen Satire, erwiesen sich bei Brant stärker als die philosophische Bedeutung der mythologischen Botscha.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.