what are you reading?

[wba]

FERDYDURKE by Gombrowicz, which is great, but it seems all translations are of the edited 2nd polish version from the 50s and the first published Polish edition from 1937 hasn't been translated into any "western" languages.
Which really sucks!

Or do any of you guys know better and can direct me to a foreign translation of the original text from the 1930s?
Too bad I can't read Polish, though.

[kanafani]

Emile Zola’s The Debacle, capturing the events of the Franco-German war of 1870. Superlative war novel, quite brutal in its depiction of the pitiful experience of French soldiers and civilians during the campaign. The first 450 pages deal with the war itself, mostly by the frontier with Belgium, then the last 50 pages or so switch to Paris to cover the Commune. This last part felt very rushed and is not as satisfactory as the first part. The commune deserved its own, separate novel. This is not on the level of Germinal but is still a great novel.

[Evelyn Library P.I.]

David Thomson's book on Warner Bros. It's part of Yale University Press's Jewish Lives series, but it's not straightforward biography, it's a David Thomson production, which means it's scattered highly speculative mediations expressing first and only a poetic interpretation of the facts while assuming you already know the facts Thomson's riffing on. I never seem to remember that I don't like David Thomson's writing style or intellectual approach and that whenever I read him I pledge to never again. Oh well, almost done.

[thoxans]

I never seem to remember that I don't like David Thomson's writing style or intellectual approach and that whenever I read him I pledge to never again. Oh well, almost done.

based

[Roscoe]

A TALE OF TWO CITIES for some reason, and very enjoyable it is.

[sally]

FERDYDURKE by Gombrowicz, which is great, but it seems all translations are of the edited 2nd polish version from the 50s and the first published Polish edition from 1937 hasn't been translated into any "western" languages.
Which really sucks!

Or do any of you guys know better and can direct me to a foreign translation of the original text from the 1930s?
Too bad I can't read Polish, though.

i last read the danuta borchardt translation (2000), wasn't aware it wasn't from the original version. gombrowicz is one of my favourite authors, like top 3 (him, walser & klossowski) but i'm thankful enough it got translated from polish at all, half of his other books came to english via french. (although whatever confected mish-mash of interpretations landed me the first version of cosmos i read, it was a blessing anyway)

been a bit down lately so had to reach for a reserve 'held for emergency' book, one of those even though i've never read it guaranteed to cheer me up and it coincidentally is a gombrowicz - his trans-atlantyk. delightfully gombrowicz-y. also, just calling people shitheads over and over is my sense of humour.

[wba]

FERDYDURKE by Gombrowicz, which is great, but it seems all translations are of the edited 2nd polish version from the 50s and the first published Polish edition from 1937 hasn't been translated into any "western" languages.
Which really sucks!

Or do any of you guys know better and can direct me to a foreign translation of the original text from the 1930s?
Too bad I can't read Polish, though.

i last read the danuta borchardt translation (2000), wasn't aware it wasn't from the original version. gombrowicz is one of my favourite authors, like top 3 (him, walser & klossowski) but i'm thankful enough it got translated from polish at all, half of his other books came to english via french. (although whatever confected mish-mash of interpretations landed me the first version of cosmos i read, it was a blessing anyway)

been a bit down lately so had to reach for a reserve 'held for emergency' book, one of those even though i've never read it guaranteed to cheer me up and it coincidentally is a gombrowicz - his trans-atlantyk. delightfully gombrowicz-y. also, just calling people shitheads over and over is my sense of humour.

This was my first Gombrowicz and it was fantastic, defintiely a new favorite, and I will check out his other stuff in the coming years (coincidentally I have Trans-Atlantik as a paperback at home, which was my first Gombrowicz I bought a few years ago, so maybe this one will be next). Most of Gombrowiczs novels came out in (West) Germany translated from polish during the 1960s, as there was a little "boom" after Ferdydurke got published in German in an excellent translation/interpretation in 1960. Since then there have been a few "complete works" editions. But as is often the case, they aren't really complete.

As far as I could gather, Gombrowicz himself revised (some parts of) Ferdydurke and this second version got published in Poland in 1954(?) and is the version all other translations after 1954 are seemingly based on.
It's not uncommon for writers to return to previously published material and rewrite it a bit: Friedrich Dürrenmatt did this extensively and numerous times with a lot of his works for example, and I know that Blanchot did this with some of his novels and also some surrealists like Louis Aragon and André Breton (for "Nadja", originally published in 1928) for example.

I'm currently reading Swiss author Gottfried Keller's "The People of Seldwyla" which was originally published in 1856, and though I'm reading it in a wonderful annotated edition with like 200 pages of alternate versions, explanations and other great stuff, the "scientific" consensus in academic literary criticism in Germany seems to be that the last authorized edition of the writer is the ultimate one, the one referred to etc. etc. which SUCKS BIG TIME. So I cannot actually read the publication from 1856, but have to read the revised edition from the second printing from 1875 (though thank god the "variants" that have been left out in the second edition at least are published scattered through the appendix, so I can piece the original version together). In my opinion, all versions should always be published, especially if collections are called or advertised as "the Complete works of...".
But I guess if you're not Franz Kafka - where you have even the original manuscripts in his handwriting published in Germany - you have to suffer.

Another recent example I found - of a somewhat different kind, though - was the novel "Der Überläufer" by Wilhelm Lehmann (who has a mastery of the German language comparable to Nietzsche or Rilke). The novel was completed in 1927 but was rejected by many publishing houses of the Weimar republic during the late 1920s because it was not commercial enough and wouldn't sell, and Lehmann was unable to find a publisher until 1960... When the novel finally got published in 1962, huge chunks of it (some 50 to 100 pages) were excised, though Lehmann reportedly agreed to this and also rewrote parts of the novel, so the parts that were left out wouldn't affect other parts of the novel too much. Still, no one has had the idea so far (there have been "complete" editions of "all" of his work since then in the German language) to publish the original manuscript from 1927 (though some of it has sbeen published in appendixes of academic editions as well). Another novel, curiously also titled "Der Überläufer" by Siegfried Lenz (who has been similarly popular, and is at least as important in West German literature after WWII as Günther Grass or Heinrich Böll) had also been rejected by his publishing house in 1952 and was only published after his death in 2016 (and then became a bestseller). I mention the novel by Lenz, cause both books deal with German deserters during the war, Lehmann's iduring WWI, the work by Lenz with a deserter during WWII, so both were also withheld because of political reasons.

A positive recent example of a different kind was Hans Fallada's mega-bestseller "Kleiner Mann - was nun?" ("Little Man, What Now?" in English) which was originally published in 1932 and has had more than 70 German reprints since, but has finally been published in its originally intended form in 2016, almost 85 years later... As Fallada's publishers thought the manuscript too long and not commercial enough in 1931 (they especially didn't like Fallada criticizing the Nazis and the followers of the NSDAP and all of the leftist political views of the main characters as well as much of the more explicitly sexual content), he had to leave out about one fourth of the material, which was about 150 pages.

So these are like 3 examples of (probably mostly) "political" censorship in the Weimar Republic as well as West Germany, which in 2 cases led to the novels not being published at all for some decades.

Anyway, to finish my rambling: I want to read Gombrowiczs first published edition of FERDYDURKE from 1937 as well now, and I don't want to learn Polish first to be able to do so.

PS: I've bought some Walser in recent months and hope to start reading his stuff as well in the near future. Unfortunately I'm also not familiar with Klossowski at all, so far (had to look him up ) though I remember you mentioning him (in a book on something with Nietzsche, if I'm not mistaken?).

PPS: I'm also really interested in reading "Pamietnik z okresu dojrzewania" ("Memoirs from puberty" or lit. "Memoirs from the time of immaturity"), Gombrowicz's first published book, a collection of stories he had written earlier, I believe, and which also got published in the late 50s in an extended edition under the title "Bakakaj". Have you read it, is it anything like (parts of) Ferdydurke?

[kanafani]

[sally]

PS: I've bought some Walser in recent months and hope to start reading his stuff as well in the near future. Unfortunately I'm also not familiar with Klossowski at all, so far (had to look him up ) though I remember you mentioning him (in a book on something with Nietzsche, if I'm not mistaken?).

PPS: I'm also really interested in reading "Pamietnik z okresu dojrzewania" ("Memoirs from puberty" or lit. "Memoirs from the time of immaturity"), Gombrowicz's first published book, a collection of stories he had written earlier, I believe, and which also got published in the late 50s in an extended edition under the title "Bakakaj". Have you read it, is it anything like (parts of) Ferdydurke?

wow, sorry WBA, totally missed your post above. i suppose i necessarily have a much more casual approach to what i read, most of it is translated into english, so i'm never going to get the original version anyway. wonder what you make of walser's microscript stuff. i don't think most of what they found was ever published when he was alive anyway

klossowski is my embarrassing love, he's not cool, i just get ridiculously overheated every time i read something by him, even when i go in intending to be strict and critical. my brain must be in sync with his and i wouldn't recommend him to anyone else. still, if ruiz made two films based on his books (altho 'based' does some very heavy lifting in regard to hypothesis of the stolen painting and klossowski's baphomet) maybe someone else liked him.

as for gombrowicz, no, not read bakakaj. i've read ferdydurke, cosmos, pornografia, possessed and now trans-atlantyk, and need to really ration the ones i've got left.

currently reading evolution as a religion by mary midgley not because i particularly wanted to, i've just been staring at the spine on my bookshelf for months and i'm sick of it. can't even remember how it came into my possession. it's annoyed me in the first 10 pages. british 'philosophy' is so constipated, takes 10 pages to over- and repeatedly explain what a frenchman would wave off in a footnote. and it's so insular, it's only legitimate to quote liberally from wittgenstein, nietzsche and aquinas but god forbid you even admit the existence of the flaky european stuff. thanks ms no-nonsense school ma'am midgley, but hannah arendt pretty much covered your entire topic in one paragraph of the human condition.

on the other hand, the book SMELLS amazing. i love that old print stink

[wba]

PS: I've bought some Walser in recent months and hope to start reading his stuff as well in the near future. Unfortunately I'm also not familiar with Klossowski at all, so far (had to look him up ) though I remember you mentioning him (in a book on something with Nietzsche, if I'm not mistaken?).

PPS: I'm also really interested in reading "Pamietnik z okresu dojrzewania" ("Memoirs from puberty" or lit. "Memoirs from the time of immaturity"), Gombrowicz's first published book, a collection of stories he had written earlier, I believe, and which also got published in the late 50s in an extended edition under the title "Bakakaj". Have you read it, is it anything like (parts of) Ferdydurke?

wow, sorry WBA, totally missed your post above. i suppose i necessarily have a much more casual approach to what i read, most of it is translated into english, so i'm never going to get the original version anyway. wonder what you make of walser's microscript stuff. i don't think most of what they found was ever published when he was alive anyway

klossowski is my embarrassing love, he's not cool, i just get ridiculously overheated every time i read something by him, even when i go in intending to be strict and critical. my brain must be in sync with his and i wouldn't recommend him to anyone else. still, if ruiz made two films based on his books (altho 'based' does some very heavy lifting in regard to hypothesis of the stolen painting and klossowski's baphomet) maybe someone else liked him.

as for gombrowicz, no, not read bakakaj. i've read ferdydurke, cosmos, pornografia, possessed and now trans-atlantyk, and need to really ration the ones i've got left.

currently reading evolution as a religion by mary midgley not because i particularly wanted to, i've just been staring at the spine on my bookshelf for months and i'm sick of it. can't even remember how it came into my possession. it's annoyed me in the first 10 pages. british 'philosophy' is so constipated, takes 10 pages to over- and repeatedly explain what a frenchman would wave off in a footnote. and it's so insular, it's only legitimate to quote liberally from wittgenstein, nietzsche and aquinas but god forbid you even admit the existence of the flaky european stuff. thanks ms no-nonsense school ma'am midgley, but hannah arendt pretty much covered your entire topic in one paragraph of the human condition.

on the other hand, the book SMELLS amazing. i love that old print stink

I guess my approach to reading has changed after years of being hypercritical of film stuff (correct aspect ratio, uncut, good print, correct projection at the cinema, etc. etc. etc)
Nowadays I just want to know how something was published or written originally whenever possible (or the stuff interests me) and it's satisfying to be able to read such things. I'm probably also sensitive because 99% of silent films we are able only to watch in truncated edited and fragmented form, and even if a film is supposedly "complete" there are often still different original film negatives and different versions for different markets that were later cobbled together to get this "complete" version (so nah, not complete). Also that it's nigh impossible to watch German sound films from 1929 to 1945 in anything but shortened and censored versions (the Weimar stuff cut by the Nazis, then the Nazi stuff cut by West Germany and East Germany), so I guess nowadays that I'm watching few films and reading a lot, I may be naive and delusional again and hoping that censorship in literature has been better documented and some of it restored/reversed than it has been throughout film history.

But I'm bickering and lamenting again.

That microscript stuff by Walser looks fantastic and sounds great. Didn't know about it. I will probably start with some "classic" stuff by Walser, though. I'm also looking forward to more Gombrowicz and will ration accordingly as well. I seldom read two or three books by a single author in a year, though I'm currently trying to change that a bit (which is easier of course, now that I actually have a reading habit again).

I'm (also) hyper-critical of any philosophy stuff, but I also don't understand much of it (though i studied Philosophy for many years at university). I love reading Plato for example, but don't know what the heck Aristoteles is trying to tell me. Same with Kant and Nietzsche. I never understand a single page of Kant, I literally don't understand what he's trying to tell me, but reading Nietzsche is like reading my own thoughts printed on a page mostly, so that's fun. Haven't read anything in a long time though, not even the more "popular scientific" stuff from the 20th or 21st century, so maybe I would be more relaxed now? (though I tried Kant last year and gave up after reading the first 3 pages 10 times - nada, I could be reading mathematic formulas or some unknown hieroglyphs... )
Maybe I'll start with somehting relaxing and soothing like Derrida or Foucault and also read some Plato to "get into the mood", but I'm not planning anything definitive.

I also like to smell books, sometimes excessively, but I tend to be drawn to rather "newer" editions. Often I'm holding 100+ year old books in my hands which merely stink or give me the creeps and which I wouldn't toucht under other circumstances, - but beggars can't be choosers, as the saying goes.

[nrh]

That microscript stuff by Walser looks fantastic and sounds great. Didn't know about it. I will probably start with some "classic" stuff by Walser, though.

i always recommend his odd little novella the walk to anyone reading walser for the first time; it's the one i keep coming back to and the one that opened up his sensibility for me the most. i do wish i had waited to read the microscripts until later.

just starting jean lous schefer's the ordinary man of cinema (after seeing him in gomes danses macabres) and iris murdoch's the good apprentice.

klossowski is in all the news lately, since his novel suspended vocation just got translated into english. the ruiz adaptation is maybe the only ruiz i can't be bothered to finish, wonder if reading the book will help.

[Umbugbene]

I'm (also) hyper-critical of any philosophy stuff, but I also don't understand much of it (though i studied Philosophy for many years at university). I love reading Plato for example, but don't know what the heck Aristoteles is trying to tell me. Same with Kant and Nietzsche. I never understand a single page of Kant, I literally don't understand what he's trying to tell me, but reading Nietzsche is like reading my own thoughts printed on a page mostly, so that's fun. Haven't read anything in a long time though, not even the more "popular scientific" stuff from the 20th or 21st century, so maybe I would be more relaxed now? (though I tried Kant last year and gave up after reading the first 3 pages 10 times - nada, I could be reading mathematic formulas or some unknown hieroglyphs... )

Are you reading Kant in German or English? I've heard of at least one native German scholar who learned English for the sole purpose of reading Kant in translation, because Norman Kemp Smith's translation is so much more lucid than Kant's original convoluted expression.

[Holymanm]

https://www.earlymoderntexts.com/

^ more intelligible, modern versions of lots of that stuff

[augusto]

i'm currently reading the baphomet! have been for little more than a week after i realized i'm teaching online for another semester and needed something to intermittently take me away from the screen. not entirely sure why i picked the klossowski, but i'd bought this one after reading his sade book, and it'd been lying unread for close to...8 years now? felt about time. bit dense, and mental, but frequently funny, and when frederick the anteating antichrist first gets a mention, i cracked up for no reason.

[thoxans]

fundamentals of corporate finance

[kanafani]

fundamentals of corporate finance

[brian d]

haha, goes well with his avatar. that'd be my reaction too

[thoxans]

too

me reading the material = my avatar
me trying to understand = kanafani's avatar
me finally understanding = bd's avatar

[wba]

That microscript stuff by Walser looks fantastic and sounds great. Didn't know about it. I will probably start with some "classic" stuff by Walser, though.

i always recommend his odd little novella the walk to anyone reading walser for the first time; it's the one i keep coming back to and the one that opened up his sensibility for me the most. i do wish i had waited to read the microscripts until later.

just starting jean lous schefer's the ordinary man of cinema (after seeing him in gomes danses macabres) and iris murdoch's the good apprentice.

klossowski is in all the news lately, since his novel suspended vocation just got translated into english. the ruiz adaptation is maybe the only ruiz i can't be bothered to finish, wonder if reading the book will help.

thanks for the rec, I'll keep it in mind: "Der Spaziergang" it's called in German, I guess. I just bought a book by Walser in my local library for 50 cents before going to vacation 3 weeks ago. Not sure anymore which exactly it was (either "Der Gehülfe" or
"Jakob von Gunten"), but this will probably be my first Walser, then. Don't know when I'll get to it exactly, though with around 1500 unread books currently still lying around in my place and with roughly 60 of the 80 books I've read this year being loans from various local libraries...
But I'm definitely looking forward to Walser!!!!

Just discovered that Schefer's book has been translated into German in 2013, but for some reason I haven't/hadn't bought it back then? ... Very strange. Or maybe I borrowed it to a friend and didn't get it back (yet). Haven't read it but it's on my to read list, obviously.

Never read Murdoch. Is she interesting?

Will get to the Klossowski, hopefully, some day, now that my reading habits are back to normal.

[wba]

I'm (also) hyper-critical of any philosophy stuff, but I also don't understand much of it (though i studied Philosophy for many years at university). I love reading Plato for example, but don't know what the heck Aristoteles is trying to tell me. Same with Kant and Nietzsche. I never understand a single page of Kant, I literally don't understand what he's trying to tell me, but reading Nietzsche is like reading my own thoughts printed on a page mostly, so that's fun. Haven't read anything in a long time though, not even the more "popular scientific" stuff from the 20th or 21st century, so maybe I would be more relaxed now? (though I tried Kant last year and gave up after reading the first 3 pages 10 times - nada, I could be reading mathematic formulas or some unknown hieroglyphs... )

Are you reading Kant in German or English? I've heard of at least one native German scholar who learned English for the sole purpose of reading Kant in translation, because Norman Kemp Smith's translation is so much more lucid than Kant's original convoluted expression.

Yeah, I always tried it in German. Back in my youth, then at school (where we did a lot of Kant), then at University, etc. I always understand it when other people explain Kant to me, or when I (had to / used to) read books on Kant by other scholars. But that's laways automatically interpretation already in my book, and I wanted to get soime of this (or maybe something different) from reading the man himself, but have always failed. Not sure if translation might not already be interpretation (I know it's not poetry, but still...), but HERE's a great thought I never ever considered! Thanks for the idea Umbugbene!!!
I might try English first, and then maybe Slovene, (though Slovene seems to me an even more complicated language than German, so I doubt that would work).
Just need to get my hands on some cheap/free copies, cause I don't want to spend money on it if it doesn't work.
Maybe there's something on the net, to get an idea? I'll keep an eye out...

Anyways, great idea and thanks a lot!!

[wba]

https://www.earlymoderntexts.com/

^ more intelligible, modern versions of lots of that stuff

seems exactly like what I should be looking for. Thanks!
Maybe I'll also compare some Kant in German to those English translations and see if I can get into Kant's head that way?

[wba]

too

me reading the material = my avatar
me trying to understand = kanafani's avatar
me finally understanding = bd's avatar

Thanks guys, this thread is great!

[wba]

Er, a question that's been hovering in my mind for a few months now: anyone familiar with any novels by Edward Bulwer-Lytton?
And anyone know a place where one could purchase a decent unabridged but potentially cheap edition of some of his works?
Or how to discriminate between good editions and nasty rip-offs by online/internet publishers trying to get a quick buck with un-copyrighted material through badly automatized copy and paste procedures?

I'm not too keen on reading stuff online or on an e-book device or such, though I have found wonderfully digitized stuff of his for free on the net, which I have so far partially (and secretly ) printed out at work. But I'd still rather read a bound book than reading all those copied pages (which has been fun though, so far). I have started with his serial(ized) novel ERNEST MALTRAVERS (1837-), which is great so far (and has nice drawings from some old edition).

[sally]

ahaaaaaaa it's arrived!!!!!!!!!!!yippeeeeeee

if there isn't a depraved george osborne orgy by the end of the first chapter i'm hurling it thru the window

[der kulterer]

I never understand a single page of Kant

my favorite "Kant reading" (tho Kant is there only in "supportive role") is...

i am aware "Kant reading" sounds a bit as "Ally watching" but i truly read the book word by word and it turned out to be crucial text which triggered my high interest into the subject of "Jena circle of Early German Romanticism" and reading several other related books, as f.e. "History of Early Romanticism: Fichte, Schlegel, Novalis" by Břetislav Horyna...

of which i am currently in the middle and i already resolved to find it in some second hand book shop (the current copy i have from library) so i can have it any time at hand. it is great book and i would like to recommend it, but as it is the the book by bohemian author written in bohemian language any recommendations to the international audience are near to pointless. however, there is still the first one by Manfred Frank (written in german, translated in english, available on kg) which i wholeheartedly recommend to all the Kant enthusiasts.

[wba]

I never understand a single page of Kant

my favorite "Kant reading" (tho Kant is there only in "supportive role") is...

i am aware "Kant reading" sounds a bit as "Ally watching" but i truly read the book word by word and it turned out to be crucial text which triggered my high interest into the subject of "Jena circle of Early German Romanticism" and reading several other related books, as f.e. "History of Early Romanticism: Fichte, Schlegel, Novalis" by Břetislav Horyna...

of which i am currently in the middle and i already resolved to find it in some second hand book shop (the current copy i have from library) so i can have it any time at hand. it is great book and i would like to recommend it, but as it is the the book by bohemian author written in bohemian language any recommendations to the international audience are near to pointless. however, there is still the first one by Manfred Frank (written in german, translated in english, available on kg) which i wholeheartedly recommend to all the Kant enthusiasts.

Thanks for the suggestions jiri!
I have actually been reading some Novalis this month (the available fragment(s) of his unfinished novel "Heinrich von Afterdingen" which he wrote in 1799/1800, not long before his death) which was excellent and also got me interested in reading some Schlegel and Fichte. What a coincidence! Don't know when I'll get there, though, as I've still some 30 books from the library which need to be finished first (too much Achim von Arnim, one Wilhelm Jensen, lots of Wilhelm Lehmann, and some D'Annunzio, Tucholsky, Gao Xingjian, Maurice Leblanc, Jean Giraudoux, Hans Christian Andersen, etc. etc.), which will probably take time till the end of the year as I also add in some stuff from my own bookshelves to the mix, and I unfortunately don't own any books by Schlegel or Fichte yet. But they seem very fascinating to me, and somewhat removed from the ideas of Kant, with their romanticised idealism seemingly being opposed to the ideas of the "enlightenment" period before them. Certainly Novalis is - from what I've read - the polar opposite of Kant. Anyways, my understanding of Kant only comes from some of his interpreters and my philosophy professors, as you know, so it's nowhere my own.

[wba]

PS: Wow, this Manfred Frank guy sounds really fascinating! I might buy or borrow three of his books on that early romanticism topic and their (from our current historicized perspective) somewhat different take of Schlegel, Novalis et al on (some aspects of) Kant. Seems totally like my kind of thing!

[der kulterer]

this Manfred Frank guy sounds really fascinating!

besides "Phi. F. of E. Ger. Rom.", i started to read by Manfred Frank some time ago "What is neostructuralism?" and about in the middle i put it aside (to get back later - i don't intend to give up). as far as i understand Manfred Frank's favorite is Friedrich Schleiermacher about whom i am completely unfamiliar by now (in advance, i am somewhat sceptical he can be as cool as Novalis or Schlegel).

Certainly Novalis is - from what I've read - the polar opposite of Kant.

Novalis studied philosophy under Reinhold (main exponent of Kant) and adopted critical view of Reinhold's (Kant's) foundationalism...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foundationalism
his anti-foundationalism is however directed mainly towards Fichte (another in the line coming from Kant) in "Fichte Studies". I started to read "Fichte Studies" but put it aside in favor of reading Břetislav Horyna (above), cuz i have also somewhat an issue with reading (and getting something out of it) primary sources. i find much more accessible the interpretations by ppl like Manfred Frank or Břetislav Horyna who are already familiar with the whole oeuvre of Novalis or Schlegel. at the end of the book by Horyna is a sections of excerpts from Fichte, Holderlin, Schelling, Schleiermacher, Schlegel, Novalis. so first i want to finish with Horyna before continuing with "Fichte Studies" or anything else ("Heinrich von Afterdingen" i wish to read as well).
seems to me foundationalism (obsession to create complete and consistent system of thought) is the preoccupation of 80-90 percent of all the philosophers. it pertains to the line of Kant-Reinhold-Fichte-Schelling-Hegel and all the Hegel's heirs (Feuerbach, Marx on one side, and Kierkegaard on the other). at least this is what i got from this book...

and Jena circle of Early German Romantics is the "counter culture" to this broad foundationalist line. Horyna says Romantics are not against the Enlightenment (Enlightenment or Kant is even their departing point), but they don't share foundationalist rational delusions (naive delusions of Enlightenment). their attitude to dialectics is anti-Hegelian. their solution to the thesis-antithesis contradiction is not synthesis of any kind (this is for them "entering the realm of nonsense"), thesis-antithesis contradiction is supposed to be "resolved" via irony (which keeps the ambivalence). romantic concept of irony was the main Schlegel's contribution. Horyna even says the moment Romantics stopped keeping irony in the center of their thought the whole Romanticism was over (and f.e. Schlegel himself subsequently slipping into religious bigotry). Thus this issue is something i intend to investigate as much as possible and read anything and everything Schlegel (or Novalis) wrote in this regard. (Horyna mentions f.e. "Klassische Ironie, Romantische Ironie, Tragische Ironie: Zum Ursprung Dieser Begriffe" by Ernst Behler as crucial reading among secondary sources.)

Seems totally like my kind of thing!

all this Jena circle anti-foundationalism came to my attention, cuz i admire Kurt Gödel and his turning the tables on positivism via "incompleteness theorems" described in accessible form (together with Gödel's biography) f.e. in...

[der kulterer]

some time ago i watched a doc called "Vratislav Effenberger or Black Shark Hunting" (David Jařab, 2018)...
https://letterboxd.com/film/vratislav-e ... k-hunting/
about writer Vratislav Effenberger...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vratislav_Effenberger
and subsequently, i noticed he wrote a book with the enticing title "Republic and Testicles" (2012).
ultimately, i borrowed the book from the library with the sole purpose to read only one section called "The Case of Jan Palach and Olga Hepnarová" where he compares two different social protests of two different young ppl, i.e. self-immolation of Jan Palach as a specific protest to Warshaw Pact invasion to Czechoslovakia and mass murder (killing 8 random ppl with a truck) of Olga Hepnarová as a general existential protest against the rotten humanity as a whole. it was not bad, but i must admit i expected from "Republic and Testicles" a much bigger portion of blasphemy.

[thoxans]

foundations of micro and macroeconomics, and statistics for people who (think they) hate statistics