Wyniki wyszukiwania - Biblioteka Nauki

1

Negatywność jako sefira surowego sądu mieszczaństwa. Faust i Hiob

100%

Tacik P.

|

tom 23

|

nr 4

28-55

EN

The paper, drawing upon Kabbalistic inspirations, aims at constructing a philosophical model of the bourgeoisie. Many a time motifs from Jewish tradition have been grafted onto contemporary philosophy in order to explicate the metaphysical situation of modernity. Following these intuitions, the article applies the idea of the fifth Sephirah, Gevurah, i.e. “restraint” - simultaneously doubling as Din, “judgment” - to analyse the structure of being in the ontology of modernity. The nature of the fifth Sephirah proves paradoxical: it represents the power of being, based on the inherent constraint separating a thing from exteriority - as well as the power of destruction, which unites the being with the rest of reality. Therefore, the Gevurah-Din concept allows of devising a being whose mere existence springs from a central void which provides its singularity and, simultaneously, linkage with reality. The paper presents the nature of the bourgeoisie as conditioned by negativity. The bourgeois are constantly tempted by its power, yet build their identity reactively, striving for artificial stability. The iconic bourgeois lifestyle of the ruthless merchant at work and disinterested culture consumer at home, embodies this dualism. The bourgeois culture is dead throughout, as it serves only to constrain the negativity. The bourgeoisie is, however, subjected to a constant risk of imbalance, “seduction” by its innermost dark side. This construction is equally responsible for the archetypal modern hero, Faust, who chases its central void by ruining the world around him. Finally, the article juxtaposes two characters: Faust and Job, in order to give a Jewish answer to modern misery. Both Faust and Job suffer from the power of judgment, yet Faust obtains a sentence that merely reveals its void which has always propelled him. The existence of Job, on the contrary, is not equal to void - Job survives as the just.

2

Bernhard: Nestbeschmutzer i przymus powtórzenia przeciwko władzy

100%

Tacik P.

|

nr 2

244-261

EN

The paper addresses the work of an enfant terrible of the post-war Austrian culture, Thomas Bernhard, by posing questions about the relation between veridiction and a proper Nestbeschmuzung. Bernhard was frequently downplayed as a sarcastic and spiteful madman who drew sick pleasure from insulting his community. Nonetheless, as I demonstrate in the paper, the unveiling of systemic violence in Bernhard’s oeuvre reaches much deeper than just paresia. Bernhard’s prose has a structure of the fugue in which protagonists struggle with their own subjectification and objectification. It is precisely this structure of the fugue that possesses unmasking and paresiastic functions that go beyond the role of insults which make up a good part of the content this structure gives a form to. Ultimately, the fugue is a strategy to counter the overwhelming power and seek the subjectification outside of its realm.

PL

Celem artykułu jest zmierzenie się z klasycznym enfant terrible austriackiej kultury – Thomasem Bernhardem – z jednoczesną próbą zadania pytania o relacje pomiędzy wymogiem prawdomówności a prawowitym Nestbeschmutzungiem. Bernharda często dezawuowano jako pełnego sarkazmu i złośliwości szaleńca, który z niesprawiedliwego obrażania wspólnoty czerpał przyjemność. Tymczasem, jak staram się pokazać w tekście, demaskacja wspólnotowej przemocy działa u Bernharda na o wiele głębszym poziomie niż prosto pojęta paresia. Proza Bernharda przyjmuje strukturę fugi, w której bohaterowie zmagają się z problemem swojego jednoczesnego upodmiotowienia i uprzedmiotowienia. To właśnie struktura owej fugi pełni funkcje demaskatorskie i parezjastyczne, o wiele istotniejsze niż wmieszane w nią „oszczercze” treści. W ostatecznej instancji jest strategią przeciwstawienia się obezwładniającej władzy i próbą poszukiwania upodmiotowienia poza jej zasięgiem.

3

100%

Tacik P.

|

tom 89

31-44

EN

The current decade brought a neo-authoritarian wave to the countries in CEE. This process, which in certain respects runs parallel to the populist upsurge in Western countries, has its own specificity. Firstly, by focusing on the clash between “elites” and “the people”, it rekindles – in a displaced, right-wing form – the class conflict which before 1989 was an ideological staple in CEE countries. Secondly, insofar as neo-authoritarianism in CEE has often a distinctly neo-liberal agenda shadowed by declarative anti-globalism and national chauvinism, it warps the field of political struggle. Thirdly, in the neo-authoritarian turn law becomes the crucial field of ideological fight, principally in those countries where populists came to power. In this respect, new governments in CEE resort to a blend of old Fascist tools (such as dismantling of constitutional control and denying the primacy of international law) and new inventions (such as the effective state of exception in some areas of law in Poland introduced in 2015–18). The role of critical jurisprudence in CEE is therefore particularly significant and difficult. The paper argues that liberal jurisprudence, although actively engaged in analysing neo-authoritarianism, does not possess adequate conceptual tools for full success. Therefore critical jurisprudence should urgently take part in explaining neoauthoritarianism in the legal field.