Search

This article aims to show Foucault’s adaptation and creative development of Nietzsche’s findings on the production of subjects through the interplay of, closely related, knowledge and power. What I am exclusively interested in is the problem of this production, or forming, of individuals. Because both authors have a lot of revealing things to say on it, I would like to analyse their concepts as complementary and, to some extent, mutually explanatory and … corrective. Showing the specific mechanisms of power in modern society allows Foucault to reveal certain aspects of today’s subjectivity that would be difficult to see from the perspective adopted by Nietzsche. His research therefore significantly complements Nietzsche’s account of our becoming what we are. But I also believe that the conclusions which Foucault draws from his creative interpretation of Nietzsche’s revolutionary insights can be corrected, or significantly supplemented, by some ideas that can be found in Nietzsche’s work itself. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper interprets the critical (and readers') success of Georgi Gospodinov's novel Time Selter, linking it to the potential crisis of contemporary liberal consciousness. Richard Rorty's concept in his book Chance, Irony, and Solidarity (1989) is used as a theoretical approach to defining liberal cultural consciousness. The article analyses the asymmetry in the representation of private self-creation and the construction of collective forms of identity. The main focus is on the workings of memory and the different modes in which the past functions in the construction of private and collective identity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this article, we try to show that in the present century, one of the theorists in the field of philosophy of education and training, Richard Rorty, the American neopragmatist philosopher, by criticizing the past philosophical thinking about education and training to the issue of "selfcreation" as the central core of education and training in the era the present emphasizes. According to this philosopher, the purpose of education in schools, universities and educational centers is to help a person to create himself. According to this philosopher, education in educational centers, especially in America, is generally divided into two parts. In the preuniversity stage and schools, a person is taught to socialize, and in the university and academic stage, a person learns to engage in self-creation and to question the image he had in the previous period of pre-university education. To analyze the key concept of self-creation, Rorty uses the updated thoughts of John Dewey, Foucault, Nietzsche and even Heidegger to show that the philosophy of contemporary education in the current century needs to place this concept in the center of its analysis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article aims to show Foucault’s adaptation and creative development of Nietzsche's findings on the production of subjects through the interplay of, closely related, knowledge and power. What I am exclusively interested in is the problem of this production, or forming, of individuals. Because both authors have a lot of revealing things to say on it, I would like to analyse their concepts as complementary and, to some extent, mutually explanatory and ... corrective. Showing the specific mechanisms of power in modern society allows Foucault to reveal certain aspects of today's subjectivity that would be difficult to see from the perspective adopted by Nietzsche. His research therefore significantly complements Nietzsche's account of our becoming what we are. But I also believe that the conclusions which Foucault draws from his creative interpretation of Nietzsche's revolutionary insights can be corrected, or significantly supplemented, by some ideas that can be found in Nietzsche's work itself.

The text presented is a commentary on Wycinanki [Cutouts] by Wojciech Wrzosek, a historian and methodologist of historical sciences from Poznan. Wycinanki is a collection of excerpts of statements "cut out" from the texts of various authors such as historians (Robin G. Collingwood, who is also an archaeologist, Michel Foucault, Reinhart Koselleck, Jan Pomorski, representing a decidedly scientistic view of history, Hayden White, Jerzy Topolski), historians of science (Ilona Löwy--author of the Polish School of Philosophy of Medicine), philosophers (Arnold Ayer, Étienne Bonnot de Condillac, Hans Georg Gadamer, Martin Heidegger, Jerzy Kmita, Leszek Kolakowski, José Ortega y Gasset, Anna Palubicka, Willlard Van Orman Quine), as well as anthropologizing historians--(Fernand Braudel, Paul Veyne), ethnologists (Bronislaw Malinowski) or finally writers (Franz Kafka, Milan Kundera, Vladimir Nabokov, Marcel Proust). They express, in fact, the thought of the "cutter" about himself and historical thinking. Thinking about the subject matter that is Wrzosek's primary area of interest, namely historical thinking, is the main binding agent for the statements presented. It plays the role of a common language in Cutouts, the role of a kind of Koine, which makes possible the reception of the thoughts of representatives of various disciplines mentioned in the book. Wrzosek's meta-historical reflections on the historical thinking of representatives of various disciplines of the humanities are the reflections aimed at creating a new abstract figure, which is himself--a representative of integrated humanities, which creates in Cutouts--in comparison with the subject language of each fragment--a new metalinguistic quality. This is the AUTOCREATION of the author of Cutouts--the main message of the work, around which the narrative presented in it revolves. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This editorial article is a study on the letters numbered as the first and fourth from the collection of engagement correspondence between poet and translator, Felicjan Faleński, and writer, publicist and translator, Maria Trębicka, from 1854–1860, kept in the Jagiellonian Library in Kraków, volume 5780. The set of letters in Polish is composed of 626 pages in 4º format. It comprises 81 letters from Felicjan Medard Faleński (1825–1910) to Maria Trębicka (1821–1896), his wife from 1859, as well as 151 letters from Maria Trębicka to Felicjan Faleński in chronological order (though not free from errors). The article depicts the strategies used by Faleński and Trębicka to establish a bond and build a space of intimacy between the participants of the correspondence in the context of communication and psychological theories. The poet achieves this purpose not only by enchanting the addressee with his erudition and originality (assuming the mask of an eccentric, or Don Quixote) and making references to literary knowledge and outlooks they shared, but also by taking more sophisticated steps. These include the highlighting of a meta-literary character of a letter, or an invitation to transgressing linguistic and social norms (e.g. revealing details of private life, introspecting on his own character, or encouraging to break the world’s conventions together). Trębicka’s letter creates an image of her as an excellent listener, emphatic and well-read, who will allow the interlocutor to show his best side. For both of them, the correspondence space of intimacy builds a ‘second reality’, allowing for a sincere expression of emotions, hopes and fears. Their letters are similar to intimate diaries, in which the necessary contact with the recipient enables both self-knowledge and self-creation.

This article presents a reading of Nalo Hopkinson’s short stories “The Glass Bottle Trick,” “Precious,” and “Greedy Choke Puppy” that considers Caribbean Canadian subjectivity through lenses of (inter)textuality and the material/metaphorical spaces and movements of interruption. It draws from Tiffany Lethabo King’s thinking on shoals to theorize the gathering and accumulation of tales that occurs in Hopkinson’s re/imaginings of “Bluebeard,” “The Kind and the Unkind Girls,” and soucouyant folklore. The article suggests that these shoals interrupt the paths of dominant narratives in ways that force detours to emerge, adapting Rinaldo Walcott’s use of the term to explore the transformative possibilities that occur through the creation of new improvised paths, of otherwise ways of conceptualizing Caribbean Canadian being. Ultimately, it proposes that Hopkinson’s stories acknowledge and yet interrupt colonial narratives of geography, identity, and femininity, providing a framework through which to consider the unstable grounds and the searching detours of Caribbean Canadian subjectivities.

In a famous passage in “The Death of the Author,” Roland Barthes describes the writing process as embodying the disintegration of the author’s personal identity: “Writing is that neutral, composite, oblique space where our subject slips away, the negative where all identity is lost, starting with the very identity of the body writing” (142). This postmodern position is deeply rooted in classical Greek thought, in particular Plato’s harsh critique of poetic inspiration, conceived as “holy madness.” Is this equation valid, however? Does writing necessarily serve as the ultimate act of self-negation? This essay seeks to elucidate Jorge Luis Borges’ and Fernando Pessoa’s alternative views of authorial subjectivity. Borges and Pessoa – arguably two of the greatest writers of the twentieth century – conceive the interplay between writing and self-identity in rather complex fashion. Pessoa’s term “heteronym” relates to the way in which an author’s subjectivity abruptly gives way to an idiosyncratic identity who composes the poem. This recalls the Kabbalistic idea of God’s contraction (tzimzum), the creator preserving his or her passive self-identity while giving birth to other beings from his or her inner void. Discussing Shakespeare and Whitman, Borges proposes that the act of writing is a form of self-creation in which the writer begets a unique narrative identity out of himself or herself that, transfigured, is simultaneously both the same and the other.

The aim of the article is to examine the self-creation process depicted in Leonora Christina Skov's two autobiographical novels (Den, der lever stille [2018], Hvis vi ikke taler om det [2021]). The theory underlying this analysis is that autobiographical acts are in their essence more performative than constative. Following the poststructuralists claims, the study assumes that an autobiographical project consists in (re)creating the author's self rather than reflecting them as a pre-existing individual. Furthermore, self-narration will be considered here as necessary in the process of identity formation just as it is stated in Lacan's identity theory. Such a project of (re)making oneself through self-narration is taken in Skov's novels and its structure consists of three main phases. The first concerns processing the childhood traumas as well as fighting for independence as an individual. The second involves delivering a specific model of oneself through the text production. The third consists of making corrections in the previously made self-portrayal (and thus placing the identity formation in a state of constant motion). The novels' main character's striving to take control over the narrative of her life resonates perfectly with the trends of our time, where identity is often demonstrated as an ongoing process of portraying oneself through various media. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The author of this article analyses "Trzeci dziennik" (The Third Diary) in terms of the transformations taking place in Jerzy Pilch's creative strategy. The self-creation characteristic of Pilch's writing also includes the most difficult issues: illness, old age and death. Speaking about them in the context of one's own experiences is impossible outside literature. Silence becomes one of the means of communication. "Trzeci dziennik" (The Third Diary) is an attempt to testify to the victory of literature over the impossibility of expression. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article raises a series of doubts about Chris Voparil's reading of Rorty, particularly the claim that what he calls "Rorty's Pragmatic Maxim" represents what is at the heart of his philosophical vision. Those doubts are tied together with some scattered thoughts about how Voparil describes the affinities between Rorty and William James in chapter 2 of Reconstructing Pragmatism. Voparil is correct to claim that it is James, more than any other figure in the pragmatist tradition, who shares the most with Rorty in "basic philosophical orientation". Yet I also argue that Voparil fails to correctly puts his finger on what that "basic philosophical orientation" really comes to, due in large part to an excessively political reading of James and Rorty that he relies on. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Hipogrifo: revista de literatura y cultura del siglo de oro is the property of Hipogrifo: revista de literatura y cultura del siglo de oro and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

In a famous passage in "The Death of the Author," Roland Barthes describes the writing process as embodying the disintegration of the author's personal identity: "Writing is that neutral, composite, oblique space where our subject slips away, the negative where all identity is lost, starting with the very identity of the body writing" (142).1 This postmodern position is deeply rooted in classical Greek thought, in particular Plato's harsh critique of poetic inspiration, conceived as "holy madness." Is this equation valid, however? Does writing necessarily serve as the ultimate act of self-negation? This essay seeks to elucidate Jorge Luis Borges' and Fernando Pessoa's alternative views of authorial subjectivity. Borges and Pessoa - arguably two of the greatest writers of the twentieth century - conceive the interplay between writing and self-identity in rather complex fashion. Pessoa's term "heteronym" relates to the way in which an author's subjectivity abruptly gives way to an idiosyncratic identity who composes the poem. This recalls the Kabbalistic idea of God's contraction (tzimzum), the creator preserving his or her passive self-identity while giving birth to other beings from his or her inner void. Discussing Shakespeare and Whitman, Borges proposes that the act of writing is a form of self-creation in which the writer begets a unique narrative identity out of himself or herself that, transfigured, is simultaneously both the same and the other. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This editorial article is a study on the letters numbered as the first and fourth from the collection of engagement correspondence between poet and translator, Felicjan Faleński, and writer, publicist and translator, Maria Trębicka, from 1854–1860, kept in the Jagiellonian Library in Kraków, volume 5780. The set of letters in Polish is composed of 626 pages in 4º format. It comprises 81 letters from Felicjan Medard Faleński (1825–1910) to Maria Trębicka (1821–1896), his wife from 1859, as well as 151 letters from Maria Trębicka to Felicjan Faleński in chronological order (though not free from errors). The article depicts the strategies used by Faleński and Trębicka to establish a bond and build a space of intimacy between the participants of the correspondence in the context of communication and psychological theories. The poet achieves this purpose not only by enchanting the addressee with his erudition and originality (assuming the mask of an eccentric, or Don Quixote) and making references to literary knowledge and outlooks they shared, but also by taking more sophisticated steps. These include the highlighting of a meta-literary character of a letter, or an invitation to transgressing linguistic and social norms (e.g. revealing details of private life, introspecting on his own character, or encouraging to break the world’s conventions together). Trębicka’s letter creates an image of her as an excellent listener, emphatic and well-read, who will allow the interlocutor to show his best side. For both of them, the correspondence space of intimacy builds a ‘second reality’, allowing for a sincere expression of emotions, hopes and fears. Their letters are similar to intimate diaries, in which the necessary contact with the recipient enables both self-knowledge and self-creation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper explores the role individual responsibility plays in contemporary political theory. It argues that the standard luck egalitarian view—the view according to which distributive justice is ensured by holding people accountable for their exercise of responsibility in the distribution of benefits and burdens—obscures the more fundamental value of being responsible. The paper, then, introduces an account of 'self-creative responsibility' as an alternative to the standard view and shows how central elements on which this account is founded has been prominently defended in the history of Western political thought but are comparatively neglected in contemporary political theory. Relying on this account, the paper argues that society should hold persons responsible when, and only when, doing so enables them to lead responsible lives, and only on the condition that doing so does not infringe other persons' equivalently valuable ability to lead responsible lives. The account of self-creative responsibility, the paper concludes, plausibly captures the intuitive attraction of holding responsible while respecting the value of being responsible. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]