Notice, not a single sentence of substantive philosophical
analysis. Just names, and name calling. You will never find
your way into the analytic of Dasein this way.
Joe
--- Susanna Chandler <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Plus =E7a change, plus de le m=EAme chose
>
> Heidegger was not merely a man with a widely held view
> which we generally
> find distasteful, or even repulsive, today. The past does
> not make me
> squeamish or require whitewashing in the name of pc
> rhetoric. Nor do I
> believe blindly in progress so as to believe we are so
> greatly improved in
> character since Heidegger's time.
>
> All That Is Great Stands In The Storm
>
> Heidegger leap-frogged his career during the first year
> of the newly electe=
> d
> Nazi party, as a vociferous member. Appointed Rector of
> University of
> Freiberg the same year the National Socialists came to
> power, he applied
> jewish cleansing laws to the student population, is known
> to have denounced
> collegues, and gave rousing speeches about the need for
> unification. He
> believed that the fragmentation of Germany at the time
> was a "forgetting of
> being". He sought models for restoration to authentic /
> unified being in hi=
> s
> Greek studies. He did resign the next year, acting as
> Rector [chancellor]
> for only 10 months. And did help a few jewish friends
> with letters of
> recommendation. A small nod in the direction of the
> intellectual and
> academic debt he owed to jewish scholars such as his
> mentor Husserl, whose
> chair he was given at Freiberg.
>
> Interestingly, it was in the years just after stepping
> down from being the
> Rector, that Heidegger devoted himself to the origin of
> works of art. He
> found his models in Greek antiquity. It is helpful to
> remember that Nationa=
> l
> Socialists were also very interested in the subject of
> the origins of art.
> They too wished to unify and transform their
> being-in-the-world, so to
> speak, into a great collective Dasein, modeled on certain
> origins in the
> past.
>
> Yes, But What Was He Saying
>
> Having read Heidegger's Sein and Zeit many times, and
> later works, many too
> many times [enough years ago now], particularly in the
> context of
> Existentialism [small e is fine]. Looking back he seems
> nothing more than a
> ontologist of the metaphysical variety, sandwiched
> between Husserl's far
> more original Phenomenology, and the kind of ontology
> that could
> existentially hold up to fascism: Sartre and Camus. While
> he made an
> interesting connection between Kierkegaard [mr. multiple
> pseudonym] and
> Husserl, his work is largely stuffy armchair dull, and
> repetitious when not
> derivative. What is Heidegger's contribution if you take
> away Fichte [a
> genuinely maligned philosopher because of his
> pan-germanic ideas],
> Schelling, Kant, Kierkegaard, Schopenhauer, Nietzche, and
> most of all
> Husserl? The philosopher of history, Herder [creator of
> the seminar as a
> teaching form] both informed, and provides a great
> contrast. It is also eas=
> y
> to speculate on how much Hannah Arendt, his mistress, had
> to do with Sein
> und Zeit?=20
>
> In any case he is ultimately a idealistic metaphysician.
> Which is fine if
> that's what you're into. Ontology, idealism, exploration
> of history, and
> existentialism are all extremely applicable to film
> theory. But as to
> looking for inspiration from the origins of art, give me
> the usual suspects
> listed above, Bergson, Deleuze, Benjamin, Pierce. Even
> old Wittgenstein
> [whose negotiations with his own identity and ultimately
> Hitler's inner
> circle to preserve status of his sisters so they would
> not have to leave
> Austria] is much more interesting as far as art theory
> and philosophy goes.
>
> It's not his past, it's his zeitgeist, his
> being-in-his-time.
>
> Susanna Chandler
>
>
> on 4/22/03 7:15 PM, richard at [log in to unmask] wrote:
>
> > Here we go again into the well trodden muck. Because H
> "fulfilled his rol=
> e"
> > in Nazi Germany we are obligated on "sufficient"
> grounds to discard or
> > disregard his work and look elsewhere. Just as Susanna
> is obligated by t=
> his
> > trite line of argumentation to trash Newton, Einstein,
> Freud, Nietzsche a=
> nd
> > innumerable others (including those who blatantly
> degrade the opposite
> > gender) based on the disapproval of their perceived
> reprehensible
> > private/public conduct.
> > As for the mind-altering B/T, the lack of background
> (supposedly on the
> > above-mentioned grounds) to apprehend its project and
> influence is to
> > confirm an unjustifiable loss. Consider confirmation in
> the recommended a=
> nd
> > superb "silence of the limbs;.
> > Regards, Richard
> >=20
> >=20
> > Original Message -----
> > From: "Joseph Billings" <[log in to unmask]>
> > To: <[log in to unmask]>
> > Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2003 5:52 PM
> > Subject: Re: Heidegger and the cinema: Susanna Chandler
> >=20
> >=20
> >=20
> >=20
> >=20
> >>=20
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo
http://search.yahoo.com
|
