Michael Gallope
- Published in print:
- 2017
- Published Online:
- May 2018
- ISBN:
- 9780226483559
- eISBN:
- 9780226483726
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- University of Chicago Press
- DOI:
- 10.7208/chicago/9780226483726.001.0001
- Subject:
- Music, Philosophy of Music
Deep Refrains: Music, Philosophy, and the Ineffable draws together the writings of Arthur Schopenhauer, Friedrich Nietzsche, Ernst Bloch, Theodor Adorno, Vladimir Jankélévitch, Gilles Deleuze, and ...
More
Deep Refrains: Music, Philosophy, and the Ineffable draws together the writings of Arthur Schopenhauer, Friedrich Nietzsche, Ernst Bloch, Theodor Adorno, Vladimir Jankélévitch, Gilles Deleuze, and Félix Guattari in order to revisit the age-old question of music’s ineffability from a modern perspective. For these nineteenth- and twentieth-century European philosophers, music’s ineffability is a complex phenomenon that engenders an intellectually productive sense of perplexity. Through careful examination of their historical contexts and philosophical orientations, close attention to their use of language, and new interpretations of musical compositions that proved influential for their work, Deep Refrains forges the first panoptic view of their writings on music. Gallope concludes that music’s ineffability is neither a conservative phenomenon nor a pious call to silence. Instead, these philosophers ask us to think through the ways in which music’s stunning force might address, in an ethical fashion, intricate philosophical questions specific to the modern world.Less
Deep Refrains: Music, Philosophy, and the Ineffable draws together the writings of Arthur Schopenhauer, Friedrich Nietzsche, Ernst Bloch, Theodor Adorno, Vladimir Jankélévitch, Gilles Deleuze, and Félix Guattari in order to revisit the age-old question of music’s ineffability from a modern perspective. For these nineteenth- and twentieth-century European philosophers, music’s ineffability is a complex phenomenon that engenders an intellectually productive sense of perplexity. Through careful examination of their historical contexts and philosophical orientations, close attention to their use of language, and new interpretations of musical compositions that proved influential for their work, Deep Refrains forges the first panoptic view of their writings on music. Gallope concludes that music’s ineffability is neither a conservative phenomenon nor a pious call to silence. Instead, these philosophers ask us to think through the ways in which music’s stunning force might address, in an ethical fashion, intricate philosophical questions specific to the modern world.
Jacques Derrida
- Published in print:
- 2015
- Published Online:
- May 2016
- ISBN:
- 9780231170222
- eISBN:
- 9780231540124
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Columbia University Press
- DOI:
- 10.7312/columbia/9780231170222.003.0011
- Subject:
- Philosophy, Moral Philosophy
Derrida’s reflections are centrally concerned with questioning the (im)morality of forgiveness, the fear that forgiving may lead to forgetting, the reciprocity of forgiveness asked for and ...
More
Derrida’s reflections are centrally concerned with questioning the (im)morality of forgiveness, the fear that forgiving may lead to forgetting, the reciprocity of forgiveness asked for and forgiveness granted, and he seeks to find a way to think together forgiveness and reparation, the law and punishment.Less
Derrida’s reflections are centrally concerned with questioning the (im)morality of forgiveness, the fear that forgiving may lead to forgetting, the reciprocity of forgiveness asked for and forgiveness granted, and he seeks to find a way to think together forgiveness and reparation, the law and punishment.
Peter Banki
- Published in print:
- 2017
- Published Online:
- May 2018
- ISBN:
- 9780823278640
- eISBN:
- 9780823280476
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Fordham University Press
- DOI:
- 10.5422/fordham/9780823278640.001.0001
- Subject:
- Philosophy, General
The book addresses the difficulties posed by the Holocaust for a thinking of forgiveness inherited from the Abrahamic (i.e., monotheistic) tradition. As a way to approach these difficulties, it ...
More
The book addresses the difficulties posed by the Holocaust for a thinking of forgiveness inherited from the Abrahamic (i.e., monotheistic) tradition. As a way to approach these difficulties, it explores the often radically divergent positions in the debate on forgiveness in the literature of Holocaust survivors. Forgiveness is sometimes understood as a means of self-empowerment (Eva Mozes Kor); part of the inevitable process of historical normalization and amnesia (Jean Améry); or otherwise as an unresolved question, that will survive all trials and remain contemporary when the crimes of the Nazis belong to the distant past (Simon Wiesenthal). On the basis of an examination of Jacques Derrida’s concept of forgiveness (as forgiveness of the unforgivable) and its elaboration in relation to the juridical concept of Crimes Against Humanity, the book undertakes close readings of Simon Wiesenthal’s The Sunflower (Die Sonnenblume (1969)), Jean Améry’s At the Mind’s Limits (Jenseits von Schuld und Sühne (1966)), Vladimir Jankélévitch’s Forgiveness (Le Pardon (1967)), and Robert Antelme’s The Human Race (L’espèce humaine (1947)). In addition, it analyses the documentary film Forgiving Doctor Mengele (2006) on Eva Mozes Kor. Each of these works bears witness to “aporias,” or unsolvable impasses, of forgiveness, justice and responsibility in relation to the Holocaust. The book argues that Derrida’s concept of forgiveness has the capacity to transform the debate about forgiveness and the Holocaust and open new ways to read the literature, which turns around this question.Less
The book addresses the difficulties posed by the Holocaust for a thinking of forgiveness inherited from the Abrahamic (i.e., monotheistic) tradition. As a way to approach these difficulties, it explores the often radically divergent positions in the debate on forgiveness in the literature of Holocaust survivors. Forgiveness is sometimes understood as a means of self-empowerment (Eva Mozes Kor); part of the inevitable process of historical normalization and amnesia (Jean Améry); or otherwise as an unresolved question, that will survive all trials and remain contemporary when the crimes of the Nazis belong to the distant past (Simon Wiesenthal). On the basis of an examination of Jacques Derrida’s concept of forgiveness (as forgiveness of the unforgivable) and its elaboration in relation to the juridical concept of Crimes Against Humanity, the book undertakes close readings of Simon Wiesenthal’s The Sunflower (Die Sonnenblume (1969)), Jean Améry’s At the Mind’s Limits (Jenseits von Schuld und Sühne (1966)), Vladimir Jankélévitch’s Forgiveness (Le Pardon (1967)), and Robert Antelme’s The Human Race (L’espèce humaine (1947)). In addition, it analyses the documentary film Forgiving Doctor Mengele (2006) on Eva Mozes Kor. Each of these works bears witness to “aporias,” or unsolvable impasses, of forgiveness, justice and responsibility in relation to the Holocaust. The book argues that Derrida’s concept of forgiveness has the capacity to transform the debate about forgiveness and the Holocaust and open new ways to read the literature, which turns around this question.
Michael Gallope
- Published in print:
- 2017
- Published Online:
- May 2018
- ISBN:
- 9780226483559
- eISBN:
- 9780226483726
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- University of Chicago Press
- DOI:
- 10.7208/chicago/9780226483726.003.0006
- Subject:
- Music, Philosophy of Music
Chapter 3 explores the principal theme of Jankélévitch’s philosophy of music: a fidelity to music’s inconsistency based in the a priori rejection of any kind of Versprachlichung (Wittgenstinian, ...
More
Chapter 3 explores the principal theme of Jankélévitch’s philosophy of music: a fidelity to music’s inconsistency based in the a priori rejection of any kind of Versprachlichung (Wittgenstinian, Adornian, or otherwise). That is, if Bloch’s and Adorno’s conceptions of music’s ineffability were based in its vague shadowing of linguistic structure, Jankélévitch’s is based in its qualitative refusal of it. The first half of chapter 3 links Jankélévitch’s views of music with his enduring philosophical commitments: to Bergson, to the aporetic experience of the vanishing now, to key aspects of his moral philosophy, and to the metaphysical dynamism of the instant. The second half explains how Jankélévitch develops what I call a “speculative multiplicity” of philosophies of music that are united by their deliberate refusal of any kind of language-like character in music. It concludes by arguing that Jankélévitch’s philosophy is best described not as “antidialectical” but rather as practicing an “unwoven” dialectic that retains an attentive ethics to musical forms while dramatically slackening the criteria one would use to specify them.Less
Chapter 3 explores the principal theme of Jankélévitch’s philosophy of music: a fidelity to music’s inconsistency based in the a priori rejection of any kind of Versprachlichung (Wittgenstinian, Adornian, or otherwise). That is, if Bloch’s and Adorno’s conceptions of music’s ineffability were based in its vague shadowing of linguistic structure, Jankélévitch’s is based in its qualitative refusal of it. The first half of chapter 3 links Jankélévitch’s views of music with his enduring philosophical commitments: to Bergson, to the aporetic experience of the vanishing now, to key aspects of his moral philosophy, and to the metaphysical dynamism of the instant. The second half explains how Jankélévitch develops what I call a “speculative multiplicity” of philosophies of music that are united by their deliberate refusal of any kind of language-like character in music. It concludes by arguing that Jankélévitch’s philosophy is best described not as “antidialectical” but rather as practicing an “unwoven” dialectic that retains an attentive ethics to musical forms while dramatically slackening the criteria one would use to specify them.
Peter Banki
- Published in print:
- 2017
- Published Online:
- May 2018
- ISBN:
- 9780823278640
- eISBN:
- 9780823280476
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Fordham University Press
- DOI:
- 10.5422/fordham/9780823278640.003.0001
- Subject:
- Philosophy, General
The book begins by looking at the arguments made by Holocaust survivors (such as Ruth Kluger, Simon Wiesenthal, and Primo Levi) for the impossibility of forgiveness beyond any subjective volition. As ...
More
The book begins by looking at the arguments made by Holocaust survivors (such as Ruth Kluger, Simon Wiesenthal, and Primo Levi) for the impossibility of forgiveness beyond any subjective volition. As the drive towards closure and normalization, forgiveness has been interpreted, particularly since World War II, to be the enemy of justice. Against this background, Eva Mozes Kor’s Forgiving Doctor Mengele argues on the contrary that forgiveness is a means of self-empowerment of the individual. Through forgiveness, the individual can heal themselves from the traumas of the past. The introduction puts forward the thesis that what Eva Mozes Kor calls forgiveness is in fact not forgiveness, but a therapy of mourning in the name of forgiveness. What forgiveness is in relation to the Holocaust must be thought otherwise. It should be determined in relation to what Vladimir Jankélévitch calls the “inexpiable” character of Nazi crimes, i.e., a sphere foreign to any form of reconciliation, mediation, reparation, salvation, normalization, mourning, healing, apology, or excuse. If the value of forgiveness is not to be the philosophical and religious ally of the Nazi Final Solution, then it must be thought as irreducible to any pre-given finality or achieved normalization.Less
The book begins by looking at the arguments made by Holocaust survivors (such as Ruth Kluger, Simon Wiesenthal, and Primo Levi) for the impossibility of forgiveness beyond any subjective volition. As the drive towards closure and normalization, forgiveness has been interpreted, particularly since World War II, to be the enemy of justice. Against this background, Eva Mozes Kor’s Forgiving Doctor Mengele argues on the contrary that forgiveness is a means of self-empowerment of the individual. Through forgiveness, the individual can heal themselves from the traumas of the past. The introduction puts forward the thesis that what Eva Mozes Kor calls forgiveness is in fact not forgiveness, but a therapy of mourning in the name of forgiveness. What forgiveness is in relation to the Holocaust must be thought otherwise. It should be determined in relation to what Vladimir Jankélévitch calls the “inexpiable” character of Nazi crimes, i.e., a sphere foreign to any form of reconciliation, mediation, reparation, salvation, normalization, mourning, healing, apology, or excuse. If the value of forgiveness is not to be the philosophical and religious ally of the Nazi Final Solution, then it must be thought as irreducible to any pre-given finality or achieved normalization.
Dana Hollander
- Published in print:
- 2012
- Published Online:
- May 2013
- ISBN:
- 9780823249923
- eISBN:
- 9780823252626
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Fordham University Press
- DOI:
- 10.5422/fordham/9780823249923.003.0008
- Subject:
- Philosophy, Political Philosophy
Jacques Derrida's writings on forgiveness, dating from the 1990s, draw on Vladimir Jankélévitch's efforts to discern the paradoxical conditions for forgiveness. I seek to understand Derrida's ...
More
Jacques Derrida's writings on forgiveness, dating from the 1990s, draw on Vladimir Jankélévitch's efforts to discern the paradoxical conditions for forgiveness. I seek to understand Derrida's treatment of Jankélévitch and forgiveness by recalling the 1963 Colloque des intellectuels juifs de langue française, at which Jankélévitch delivered one of his key texts on forgiveness, and also the venue for Levinas's well-known Talmudic reading on forgiveness, “Toward the Other.” Looking at “Avowing—The Impossible” in the present volume, which originated as Derrida's address to the 1998 Colloque, reveals how his understanding of forgiveness is linked to his philosophical relationship to Levinas, and to both thinkers’ interrogations of being-Jewish in terms of election and universal responsibility.Less
Jacques Derrida's writings on forgiveness, dating from the 1990s, draw on Vladimir Jankélévitch's efforts to discern the paradoxical conditions for forgiveness. I seek to understand Derrida's treatment of Jankélévitch and forgiveness by recalling the 1963 Colloque des intellectuels juifs de langue française, at which Jankélévitch delivered one of his key texts on forgiveness, and also the venue for Levinas's well-known Talmudic reading on forgiveness, “Toward the Other.” Looking at “Avowing—The Impossible” in the present volume, which originated as Derrida's address to the 1998 Colloque, reveals how his understanding of forgiveness is linked to his philosophical relationship to Levinas, and to both thinkers’ interrogations of being-Jewish in terms of election and universal responsibility.
George Pattison
- Published in print:
- 2015
- Published Online:
- March 2015
- ISBN:
- 9780198724162
- eISBN:
- 9780191791970
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198724162.003.0006
- Subject:
- Religion, Philosophy of Religion, Theology
Heidegger’s idea of thrownness towards death suggests that our ultimate fate is oblivion. Can this be countered, without invoking questionable metaphysical ideas of timelessness? Starting with the ...
More
Heidegger’s idea of thrownness towards death suggests that our ultimate fate is oblivion. Can this be countered, without invoking questionable metaphysical ideas of timelessness? Starting with the experience of time as ceaseless futurition, Vladimir Jankélevitch argues that memory, especially the memory enshrined in musical souvenirs, offers some consolation, whilst suggesting that the passing of time undo the having-been of, e.g. the nameless child annihilated in the Nazi death-camp. J.-L. Chrétien sees time-experience itself as pointing towards an immemorial past and an unhoped-for future—hinted at perhaps in the mystical poetry of John of the Cross. Emmanuel Lévinas, however, argues for a more thoroughly social hope, a kind of Messianism in which time acquires meaning through ethical engagement on behalf of the orphan, widow, and stranger. The Brothers Karamazov is read as pointing to apocalyptic time, outside the order of historical time but offering solace and hope to those within it.Less
Heidegger’s idea of thrownness towards death suggests that our ultimate fate is oblivion. Can this be countered, without invoking questionable metaphysical ideas of timelessness? Starting with the experience of time as ceaseless futurition, Vladimir Jankélevitch argues that memory, especially the memory enshrined in musical souvenirs, offers some consolation, whilst suggesting that the passing of time undo the having-been of, e.g. the nameless child annihilated in the Nazi death-camp. J.-L. Chrétien sees time-experience itself as pointing towards an immemorial past and an unhoped-for future—hinted at perhaps in the mystical poetry of John of the Cross. Emmanuel Lévinas, however, argues for a more thoroughly social hope, a kind of Messianism in which time acquires meaning through ethical engagement on behalf of the orphan, widow, and stranger. The Brothers Karamazov is read as pointing to apocalyptic time, outside the order of historical time but offering solace and hope to those within it.
Ashraf H.A. Rushdy
- Published in print:
- 2018
- Published Online:
- June 2018
- ISBN:
- 9780190851972
- eISBN:
- 9780190852009
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/oso/9780190851972.003.0003
- Subject:
- Philosophy, Moral Philosophy
This chapter argues that some postmodern philosophers of forgiveness—especially John Milbank, Jacques Derrida, and Vladimir Jankélévitch—develop a restrictive model of what forgiveness is and argue ...
More
This chapter argues that some postmodern philosophers of forgiveness—especially John Milbank, Jacques Derrida, and Vladimir Jankélévitch—develop a restrictive model of what forgiveness is and argue that it is therefore “impossible” because they implicitly draw on a Pauline conception of forgiveness. In the Pauline model, the forgiveness humans extend to each other is modeled on the kind of forgiveness that a divine being can give to a fallen humanity. Milbank, Derrida, and Jankélévitch suggest that it is what forgiveness is, that it is the only practice that can be called forgiveness, and any less “pure” form of forgiveness just isn’t forgiveness. This chapter demonstrates the problem with such mystical and sceptical conceptions of the moral practice of interpersonal forgiveness.Less
This chapter argues that some postmodern philosophers of forgiveness—especially John Milbank, Jacques Derrida, and Vladimir Jankélévitch—develop a restrictive model of what forgiveness is and argue that it is therefore “impossible” because they implicitly draw on a Pauline conception of forgiveness. In the Pauline model, the forgiveness humans extend to each other is modeled on the kind of forgiveness that a divine being can give to a fallen humanity. Milbank, Derrida, and Jankélévitch suggest that it is what forgiveness is, that it is the only practice that can be called forgiveness, and any less “pure” form of forgiveness just isn’t forgiveness. This chapter demonstrates the problem with such mystical and sceptical conceptions of the moral practice of interpersonal forgiveness.
