From “catharsis in the text” to “catharsis of the text”

Q4 Arts and Humanities Forum Philosophicum Pub Date : 2020-12-04 DOI:10.35765/forphil.2020.2502.21
C. Zalewski
{"title":"From “catharsis in the text” to “catharsis of the text”","authors":"C. Zalewski","doi":"10.35765/forphil.2020.2502.21","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Roman Ingarden (1893–1970) was a prominent Polish philosopher, phenomenologist, and student of Edmund Husserl. A characteristic feature of his works was the almost complete absence of analyzes from the history of philosophy. That is why it is so surprising that right after the end of World War II, the first text analyzed when Ingarden started working at the Jagiellonian University was Aristotle’s “Poetics.” Ingarden published the results of his research in Polish in 1948 in “Kwartalnik Filozoficzny” and in the early 1960s his essay was translated and published in the renowned American magazine “The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism” as “A Marginal Commentary on Aristotle’s Poetics.”\nAs far as I know today, this text does not arouse much interest among the many commentators and followers of Ingarden’s philosophy. Perhaps this state of affairs is justified: Ingarden’s own ideas are only repeated here, and their usefulness in the meaning of “Poetics” remains far from obvious. However, I think that this relative obscurity is worth considering now, because it shows how modern reason tries to control ancient concepts. The main purpose of this article is therefore to recon- struct the strategy by which philosophy tames the text of “Poetics,” especially its concepts such as catharsis and mimesis. The discovery and presentation of these treatments would not have been possible were it not for the mimetic theory of René Girad, which provides anthropological foundations for a critique of philosophical discourse.","PeriodicalId":34385,"journal":{"name":"Forum Philosophicum","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Forum Philosophicum","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.35765/forphil.2020.2502.21","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Roman Ingarden (1893–1970) was a prominent Polish philosopher, phenomenologist, and student of Edmund Husserl. A characteristic feature of his works was the almost complete absence of analyzes from the history of philosophy. That is why it is so surprising that right after the end of World War II, the first text analyzed when Ingarden started working at the Jagiellonian University was Aristotle’s “Poetics.” Ingarden published the results of his research in Polish in 1948 in “Kwartalnik Filozoficzny” and in the early 1960s his essay was translated and published in the renowned American magazine “The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism” as “A Marginal Commentary on Aristotle’s Poetics.” As far as I know today, this text does not arouse much interest among the many commentators and followers of Ingarden’s philosophy. Perhaps this state of affairs is justified: Ingarden’s own ideas are only repeated here, and their usefulness in the meaning of “Poetics” remains far from obvious. However, I think that this relative obscurity is worth considering now, because it shows how modern reason tries to control ancient concepts. The main purpose of this article is therefore to recon- struct the strategy by which philosophy tames the text of “Poetics,” especially its concepts such as catharsis and mimesis. The discovery and presentation of these treatments would not have been possible were it not for the mimetic theory of René Girad, which provides anthropological foundations for a critique of philosophical discourse.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
从“文本中的宣泄”到“文本的宣泄”
罗曼·因加登(1893-1970),杰出的波兰哲学家、现象学家,胡塞尔的学生。他的作品的一个特点是几乎完全没有哲学史的分析。这就是为什么在第二次世界大战结束后,英加登开始在雅盖隆大学工作时,分析的第一篇文章是亚里士多德的《诗学》,这是如此令人惊讶。1948年,因加登用波兰语在《Kwartalnik Filozoficzny》上发表了他的研究成果,20世纪60年代初,他的论文被翻译并发表在著名的美国杂志《美学与艺术批评杂志》上,题为《亚里士多德诗学的边际评论》。据我今天所知,这篇文章并没有引起英加登哲学的许多评论家和追随者的多大兴趣。也许这种情况是合理的:因加登自己的思想只是在这里重复,它们在“诗学”意义上的用处还远远不够明显。然而,我认为这种相对的模糊是值得现在考虑的,因为它表明现代理性是如何试图控制古代概念的。因此,本文的主要目的是重构哲学对《诗学》文本的命名策略,尤其是其中的“净化”和“模仿”等概念。如果不是ren Girad的模仿理论,这些治疗方法的发现和呈现是不可能的,它为哲学话语的批判提供了人类学基础。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
2
审稿时长
30 weeks
期刊最新文献
Reviewers of Articles Submitted in 2023 Caputo in Europe (If There Is Such a Thing): How Does “Radical Theology” Look from Over Here? Elucidating the Role of Truth-Expressions What New Can We Learn from the Philosophical Journals of Jan Patočka? The Aesthetic Path to Hermeneutics in J.-L. Marion’s Phenomenology
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1