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

Results found: 2

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  MEISSNER AUGUST GOTTLIEB
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1
Content available remote

"Rührung, rühren, rührend" : Pražské přednášky Augusta Gottlieba Meissnera v kontextu německé estetiky 18. století

100%
Hlobil T.
Česká literatura (Czech Literature)
|
2010
|
vol. 58
|
issue 3
293-317
EN
The terms Rührung, rühren, rührend, and gerührt occur with extraordinary frequency in the lectures on aesthetics and poetics which were given at Prague University by August Gottlieb Meißner (1753–1807), as recorded by his students Josef Jungmann and Josef Liboslav Ziegler. The article aims to explain how Meißner, the ordinarius of aesthetics and classical literature at Prague, worked with these terms in his lectures and it seeks to demonstrate how their use was connected with the Enlightenment aesthetics of the eighteenth century, particularly in the German-speaking lands. The ennoblement of this set of terms in aesthetics at Prague University in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries was probably not based on any specific work. Instead, it was connected with the general aesthetic trends of the times, particularly the influential German ‘aesthetics of effect’ (Wirkungsästhetik) of the second half of the eighteenth century. This current, which constituted an alternative to the contemplatively conceived transcendental aesthetics of Immanuel Kant, made the emotions the basis of taste and art, adding a psychological-anthropological aspect to aesthetic thinking, without losing sight of the importance, even paramouncy, of the moral contribution of art. Meißner’s lectures constitute a hitherto unknown, hard to overlook part of this current of German aesthetics, which was developed at a university in the Austrian Monarchy, that is to say, beyond the frontiers of the traditional central German and north German centres of aesthetic thought. Though the concentrated interest in Rührung places Meißner’s lectures into this current, the absolutization of the term, resulting in a deliberate weakening of the moral aspect, shifts the lectures to the margins. The double role of Rührung, the most typical, most distinctive feature of the lectures, shows that Meißner was familiar not only with contemporaneous German views but also with the strikingly more pointed French and English viewpoints, which he had absorbed probably during his years at Leipzig.
2

Nástupní přednáška Augusta Gottlieba Meissnera. (Srovnání s K. H. Seibtem, F. A. C. Werthesem, J. J. Haanem, F. F. Wallrafem a E. Schneiderem)

100%
Hlobil T.
Listy filologické (Folia philologica)
|
2009
|
vol. 132
|
issue 1-2
65-93
EN
The article compares the inaugural lecture of August Gottlieb Meissner (1753-1807), Professor of Aesthetics and Classical Literature at Prague, and the first Protestant teacher at the Faculty of Arts in Prague since the Thirty Years' War, with the inaugural lectures of professors of aesthetics, or 'die Schöne Wissenschaften', at universities in the Habsburg Monarchy and at Roman Catholic universities in the Rheinland. (Chairs of Aesthetics were not established at the Protestant universities). The prerequisites for a comparison are particularly good because the inaugural lecture of Meissner's predecessor at Prague, Karl Heinrich Seibt (1730-1806), has survived, as have those of his contemporaries, Professor Friedrich August Clement Werthes (1748-1817) at Pest, Johann Jakob Haan (whose dates of birth and death are unknown) at Trier, Ferdinand Franz Wallraf (1748-1824) at Cologne, and Eulogius Schneider (1756-1794) at Bonn. The aim of the comparison is to examine the conventions according to which professors of the Schöne Wissenschaften and aesthetics wrote their inaugural lectures, and to determine, if at all, how Meissner's lecture differed in these thematic conventions. The analyses demonstrate that the focuses of the inaugural lectures consist in clarifying the usefulness of these two taught fields for the university and society. The subsequent comparison with Meissner's lecture reveals that Meissner did not incorporate even one of the usual topics into his lecture; it appears not to bear a trace of any endeavour to legitimize aesthetics, to explain what the subject was about, what it aimed to achieve, or how it might be useful. His silence about aesthetics (unlike Classical literature, still a new, far from usual discipline) leads one to search for the reasons behind this highly unusual approach. The article concludes with two hypotheses offered in explanation.
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.