PL
 |
EN
Ten serwis zostanie wyłączony 2025-02-11.
Nowa wersja platformy, zawierająca wyłącznie zasoby pełnotekstowe, jest już dostępna.
Przejdź na https://bibliotekanauki.pl
Preferencje help
Polish version English version Język
Widoczny [Schowaj] Abstrakt
Liczba wyników

Znaleziono wyników: 11

Liczba wyników na stronie
first rewind previous Strona / 1 next fast forward last
Wyniki wyszukiwania
help Sortuj według:

help Ogranicz wyniki do:
first rewind previous Strona / 1 next fast forward last
1
Content available Dzieło, którego nie ma? Praktyczne (i ontologiczne) powody niedostępności „Xięgi Bałwochwalczej”
100%
Rosiek S.
Schulz/Forum
|
2015
|
nr 5
113-122
PL
In the age of technological reproductibility the original of The Booke of Idolatry has disappeared under more and more replicas. We have been talking and writing about reproductions which are more and more distant from the original: reflections, reflexes, copies, representations, and effigies. Until today, the whole cycle of Schulz’s cliché-verres has not been published in an adequate form – there are only more successful reproductions of particular graphics. At any rate, the identity of The Booke has always been precarious and ambiguous. It has always been a work in motion – flickering, unstable, composed in various ways since particular graphics have appeared in different authorial configurations (files) each of which lead its own, independent life. Thus The Booke of Idolatry has its multiple history and no “hard” ontology. As a whole, it is not available. Still, the trouble with it begins already at the elementary level of an individual graphic. The differences among available copies have been caused by technological conditions (different chemical processing of the positives), which bring about specific material (different pace of ageing) as well as artistic consequences (replicating his cliché-verres, Schulz would choose either a sepia or a silver-black tone). As a result, different prints of the same graphic look different, which implies contingency of seeing and, what follows, also of understanding and interpretation. We may encounter The Booke of Idolatry only in its specific historical version, by coming across its individual copy. A comparison of a dozen or so preiconographic descriptions (or perhaps testimonies of looking/seeing) of the same copy of Mademoiselle Circe and Her Troupe reveals a fundamental diversity of views. Is it possible to have a debate on meaning without a consensus as regards what we can see? Is a pact concerning a visible object of the debate made (or perhaps not made?) in passing, while we interpret it in a joint effort to find its meaning?
2
Content available „Mademoiselle Circe i jej trupa”. Spojrzenia
100%
Rosiek S.
Schulz/Forum
|
2015
|
nr 5
123-132
PL
A comparison of a dozen or so preiconographic descriptions (or perhaps testimonies of looking/seeing) of the same copy of Mademoiselle Circe and Her Troupe reveals a fundamental diversity of views. Is it possible to have a debate on meaning without a consensus as regards what we can see? Is a pact concerning a visible object of the debate made (or perhaps not made?) in passing, while we interpret it in a joint effort to find its meaning?
3
Content available Bio/biblio-graficznie
100%
Rosiek S.
|
|
nr 15
174-186
PL
The easiest option would be to ask the author of The Cinnamon Shops whether it was him who many years ago wrote in German and published in the Montenegro periodical Cetinjer Zeitung two stories: “Du bist Staub” and “Pfennig mit dem Auge.” Had he said “yes,” these two unusual narratives would be included in the oeuvre of Bruno Schulz. His literary identity would have been upheld (enhanced) and confirmed. But what is the literary identity? We know full well that the foundation of an individual identity is memory which selects and integrates the particles of a particular existence. There is no identity without memory. This, however, does not apply to the literary identity, deprived of that natural basis of each identity, both individual and collective. Its foundation is congruence, i.e. the coherence, harmony, and appropriateness of its components. Trouble begins when all of a sudden we come across a text signed with a name that already exists in the literary space, and this is exactly what happened when after one hundred years two German language stories from the Cetinjer Zeitung have been retrieved. An automatic inclusion of the stories in the literary identity signed “Bruno Schulz” seems risky for many reasons. First of all, because some stranger may invade the space occupied by the son of a Drogobych cloth merchant, the actual author of The Cinnamon Shops. Let us then defend the Schulz of Drogobych from the Schulzes who come from different parts of the world, and they are many. In the first three decades of the 20th century those were, e.g., Karl Richard Bruno Schulz (1865-1932, professor of architecture), Bruno Claus Heinrich Schulz (1888-1944, oceanographer), Bruno Schulz (engineer, fleet officer), Bruno Schulz (1890-1958, psychiatrist, genetician), Bruno Kurt Schultz (1901-1997, anthropologist, in the Third Reich an SS “race” expert), and Bruno Schultz (1894-1987, economist).
4
Content available Pisma nadesłane przez prodziekana Wydziału Filologiczno-Historycznego Uniwersytetu Gdańskiego
100%
Rosiek S.
|
2008
|
tom 26
303-307
5
Content available Drohobycz stolicą XX wieku
100%
Rosiek S.
Schulz/Forum
|
2018
|
nr 11
3-4
PL
Nowadays it is impossible to think about Schulz outside Drogobych. Wherever else he showed up, be it Vienna, Marienbad, Kudowa, Zakopane, Warsaw or Paris, he was a refugee, a patient, a visitor or a tourist – always a stranger. And he considered himself one, while others did the same. To an extent, it was his own fault. It could perhaps be otherwise if he did not so often write in his letters (and most likely said in conversations) that he was unable to live and work outside his hometown. But the words of the writer could only encourage others to contribute to a stereotype of a “modest schoolteacher from a small town.” The provincial status of Schulz, however, is not so obvious. At the end of the 19th century, thanks to oil Drogobych reached the end of centuries long stasis from which even the salt mines opened in the Middle Ages could not save it. Oil changed the life of many people in Galicia. Without leaving Drogobych, Schulz could actually watch and personally experience in doses which let him keep his independence and inner stability the rise of a metropolitan mentality described by Georg Simmel. Yet Paris was too much for him – after three weeks he escaped from the French capital with not a single word of commentary. To live in the capital of the 19th century, as Walter Benjamin called it, would have been a torture for him. Thus Schulz did not cancel the opposition of center and periphery, the capital and the provinces, but turned such distinctions upside down. Thanks to writing, the center of the world moved to his hometown so that perhaps Drogobych became the capital of the 20th century.
6
Content available Zobaczyć Drohobycz (i…)
100%
Rosiek S.
Schulz/Forum
|
2018
|
nr 11
85-100
PL
But which Drogobych? There are many of them. Certainly it is not the town which now belongs to Ukraine. One may easily go there for a tourist trip. What is at stake in this game – the game of aspects, views, and images – is not the Drogobych that is actually accessible, but the one that is probably gone forever no longer to be found. In that Drogobych, of the cinnamon shops, Schulz was born and lived. Can we still have any access to it? The safest and the shortest way to Drogobych runs through Cinnamon Shops. Schulz’s drawings and graphic works, where the town is always the setting, may be of some help, too. But there is also another way, through collecting documents and meticulous reconstructing of the place (and time). It is taken by these travelers who are passionate collectors of postcards and photos. Each town has its visual conventions beyond which it is hard to reach. The more often towns and cities are photographed – Paris is a good example – the more prevalent and permanent visual schemas become. The spectator must abandon them to see the place with an unprejudiced eye. Also the official photos of Drogobych from the early 20th century show some kind of excess of the visible. Yet it is enough to change perspective, reduce the distance or enlarge the background and suddenly the official locations may reveal their private atmosphere.
7
Content available Zachwyt Ficowskiego
100%
Rosiek S.
Schulz/Forum
|
2013
|
nr 3
3-4
PL
Schulz studies were born of rapture. In 1943 Jerzy Ficowski wrote a short study on Bruno Schulz, bound it, and titled it Regions of Great Heresy. That event can be now called the founding act of Schulz studies. Commenting on his work many years later, Ficowski realized that its permanent element was his rapture and the title to be assigned to more and more comprehensive versions of his early study. Schulz had attracted the critics’ interest already before, but the early critical reviews were all in one way or another involved in current literary debates in which Schulz represented the “regions of great heresy.” His death in 1942 changed the situation immediately since it excluded him from any future dialog. Not knowing about it, Ficowski wrote a letter to Schulz, hoping that the writer would respond, but the dead do not write letters. His rapture Ficowski translated into his study of Schulz. Today we know that it was a work of his lifetime, thanks to which Schulz, after years of marginalization and even absence, survived in literature. Ficowski was the founder of Schulz studies. Many readers have approached his Regions of Great Heresy as a document, a genuine source of information. Equally important is a trilogy also prepared by Ficowski, including, first, the Book of Letters, second, the Book of Images, and now it is high time we had the Book of Memories. It should consist of the letters wrritten to Ficowski by the witnesses of Schulz’s life.
8
Content available Komentowanie i oczywistości
100%
Rosiek S.
Schulz/Forum
|
2013
|
nr 3
112-118
PL
The author makes a general statement that writers such as Bruno Schulz, who do not help their audience interpret their texts, require commentary that is potentially boundless. Referring to the tradition of Polish editorship and textual studies, he specifies the list of tasks of the commentator – in this case the commentator of Schulz’s fiction – which includes explaining not only the meaning(s) of particular lexical items or cultural allusions, but also all the potential ambiguities at the level of interpretation. This is why, according to Rosiek, commentary occupies the space between “lexicon and interpretation,” and there are no rules that may help a particular editor find his or her way about there. The most important universal directive it to explain virtually everything since the continuity of culture, connecting different generations is no longer a fact, if it ever was one.
9
Content available Dotknięcia historii
100%
Rosiek S.
|
|
nr 10
PL
Bruno Schulz did not live in “good times,” but still history shows up in his legend and biography just once, as the Holocaust of which he was a victim. All his earlier life has been usually described as a relatively quiet existence in a small, provincial town forgotten by history. This is very misleading. Schulz personally experienced a lot of what the unquiet 20th century had in store. Without much effort, one may assemble a fairly long list of historical events that determined the course of his life, such as the bloody election campaign to the Austro-Hungarian Parliament of June 19, 1911 or the mass escape in 1914. After the Great War, Schulz’s world slowly came back to normal. Demons woke up again in the 1930s. Do the historical events discussed in the texts included in the present Schulz/Forum issue point to some biographical constant that was influencing Schulz’s choices? Or perhaps, like Zbigniew Herbert’s Mr Cogito, Schulz chose to play a minor part on the stage of history?
10
Content available Schulz poza czasem
100%
Rosiek S.
|
|
nr 10
EN
Schulz did not dwell in history. He lived apart from society, limiting his social contacts and giving them ritual forms. Generations of Polish Schulz scholars have seen him predominantly as an artist, an exceptional, unique writer, a “master of the Polish language,” while the Jewish diaspora has been approaching him in a very different way, mainly as a “symbol of the Holocaust and the loss that it caused.” These conflicting points of view point to a gap between art (literature) and history (biography). Schulz brought both domains together. He attempted to find and adopt a form of living in history and art that would let him keep at least some independence from the former. He believed that in writing or drawing it was possible to start “from oneself.” His artistic and literary works reveal a continuous endeavor to escape from history, if only in art. Was that possible at all? Can an artist escape from history, resist the power of temporality? The present essay is an attempt to address these questions. As a draughtsman, Schulz can hardly be placed in his epoch: he neither belongs to it, nor can be reduced to its norms. Except for his commissioned works, his oeuvre exists out of time, out of the artistic tradition, in three different genres: self-portrait, illustration, and compulsive drawing. It is characteristic that almost all his works from the third group are sketches. They seem to have no history, existing out of time and beyond the received conventions. Schulz’s sketch is a graphic gesture rather than an artistic activity. Whenever he tooka pen and a sheet of paper, he was everywhere and nowhere, always and never; out of time, imprisoned only in his present emotion. What is art for then? Under such circumstances, the major artistic controversies of the epoch seem irrelevant because something else is at stake. Schulz wanted to abolish the boundary between the draughtsman and the drawn, disappear in the act of creation, make that fact a fact of life. Does the literary work of the draughtsman follow the same principle? The final part of the essay is an argument for this hypothesis.
11
Content available Śmierć Fotografa
88%
Rosiek S.
Schulz/Forum
|
2018
|
nr 12
PL
The mourning note on Bogdan Konopka, photographer and a friend of Schulz/Forum.
first rewind previous Strona / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript jest wyłączony w Twojej przeglądarce internetowej. Włącz go, a następnie odśwież stronę, aby móc w pełni z niej korzystać.