FRIEDRICH SCHLEGEL’S “PHILOSOPHY OF THE HOLISTIC MAN” AS A ROMANTIC CRITIQUE OF BOURGEOIS CULTURE

2021 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 45-53
Author(s):  
N. N. Misyurov
Keyword(s):  
Author(s):  
Pavlína Rychterová

This chapter examines the growing importance of the vernacular languages during the later Middle Ages in shaping the form, content, and audiences of political discourse. It presents a famously wicked king of the late Middle Ages, Wenceslas IV (1361–1419), as a case study and traces the origins of his bad reputation to a group of fourteenth- and fifteenth-century writings. These have often been dismissed as fictions or studied solely as literature, but in fact they represent new modes of articulating good and bad kingship. The chapter shows that, in the context of an increasingly literate bourgeois culture, especially in university cities, these vernacular works transformed Latin theological approaches to monarchy, while rendering mirrors for princes and related literatures accessible to an unprecedented audience.


Author(s):  
Robert J. Antonio

Distinguished by extreme, systematized rationalism, Weber argued, bourgeois culture makes the social world in some ways more predictable and more comfortable but precludes a widely shared good life and social justice. He stressed emphatically that free-market capitalism, by maximizing formal rationality oriented to capital accounting and profitability, produces substantively “irrational” consequences that undermine the sociocultural and material fabric needed to sustain it. More than forty years of neoliberal restructuring, designed to accelerate capital accumulation at almost any cost, has generated massive corporate scandals, extreme economic inequalities, and global environmental problems that threaten its political legitimacy and social and ecological foundations. This chapter explores how Weber anticipated the types of substantive irrationalities suffered by today’s neoliberal regimes.


2007 ◽  
Vol 35 (2) ◽  
pp. 697-709
Author(s):  
Jock Macleod

AS AN UNDERGRADUATE IN THE1970s, my introduction to the 1890s was perfunctory. Squeezed into a couple of weeks in the middle of a year-long course on “Victorian and Modern Literature,” the literature of the decade was reduced to aestheticism and decadence and presented as something of a preliminary to the real business of modernism. Such a focus reflected the scholarship of the time, in which thefin de sièclewas constructed as a moment of transition, one in which the political and socio-ethical dimensions so central to high Victorian literature were evacuated, as arguments for the autonomy of art came to dominate the literary cultural landscape. The organising principle was one of bifurcation: the separating out ofavant gardefrom bourgeois culture, the high from the low and, of particular relevance to this essay, literature from politics.


2016 ◽  
Vol 96 (1) ◽  
pp. 132-155
Author(s):  
Erlan Medeubayev

The article deals with the implementation of the complex of political and socio-economic measures of the Soviet state, called the policy of “war communism” in the cities of the Steppes and Turkestan in 1918-1921. Based on materials gleaned from various sources, the author endeavours to explore the processes of socialization and municipalization of private houses and dwellings, the nationalization of private property, which took place in the cities of the KazASSR and tassr; highlight some of the issues related to the subject policy of “war communism” in the cities of Kazakhstan. Various restrictive decrees and orders of the Soviet power in this period, aimed at limiting commodity-money relations and the prohibition of the right to private property put people into a rigid framework of survival. Approved in the sphere of public life, the ideology of “war communism” inevitably left its mark on the life of the city. This ideology was a special sociocultural phenomenon, strengthening other social psychology and ethics which propagandized the need to destroy the old “bourgeois” culture and create a new “proletarian culture”. “War Communism” as opposed to “bourgeois individualism” principles of the socialist community, broske vital foundations of society. A characteristic feature of this period is the legitimization of violence and its use as a universal remedy of solving all problems. Under the pressure of revolutionary changes the sense of justice in society underwent considerable transformation. The right to inviolability of private property was completely ignored. The ruling regime no longer recognized the existing legal mechanisms, replacing them with the amorphous concept of “revolutionary legality.”


Author(s):  
Maciej Hułas

The paper argues that the original normativity that provides the basis for Habermas’s model of the public sphere remains untouched at its core, despite having undergone some corrective alterations since the time of its first unveiling in the 1960s. This normative core is derived from two individual claims, historically articulated in the eighteenth-century’s “golden age” of reason and liberty as both sacred and self-evident: (1) the individual right to an unrestrained disposal of one’s private property; and (2) the individual right to formulate one’s opinion in the course of public debate. Habermas perceives the public sphere anchored to these two fundamental freedoms/rights as an arena of interactive opinion exchange with the capacity to solidly and reliably generate sound reason and public rationality. Despite its historical and cultural attachments to the bourgeois culture as its classical setting, Habermas’s model of the public sphere, due to its universal normativity, maintains its unique character, even if it has been thoroughly reformulated by social theories that run contrary to his original vision of the lifeworld, organized and ruled by autonomous rational individuals.     


Schulz/Forum ◽  
2018 ◽  
pp. 101-116
Author(s):  
Jerzy Kandziora

The topic of the paper are descriptions of apartments pccupied by Bruno Schulz and his two friends, Emanuel Pilpel and Stanisław Weingarten, included in the letters written by eye-witnesses to Jerzy Ficowski. The perception of those interiors was ambivalent – some accounts stress the dark and unhealthy atmosphere of the house. Even though they come from Schulz’s friends, they prove that his otherness was not fully accepted by them. There are also descriptions made by open-minded young observers, mainly schoolboys, for whom Schulz’s den is a temple of goodness and art. The accounts of the apartments of Pilpel and Weingarten also show problems with accepting otherness. The analysis presented makes the reader realize the distance separating Schulz and his friends from the stereotypical bourgeois culture.


1981 ◽  
Vol 86 (5) ◽  
pp. 1102
Author(s):  
Theresa M. McBride ◽  
Michael B. Miller

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document