Scholarlink

Abstract <p>The main purpose of this work is to explore the experience of confronting guilt “after Auschwitz” in the creative dialogue between two significant poets of the twentieth century, Paul Celan and Johannes Bobrowski. Despite their importance, their works remain inadequately studied, particularly in the context of the interaction between language and existence, or more precisely, poetic semiotics and the ontological foundation of existence. Celan, in his “Fugue of Death,” delivered the final verdict on the language of Germany after Auschwitz, declaring that Death had become the teacher of German. But Bobrowski for all his closeness to Celan in his conviction that Auschwitz proved the adocentrism of the German language, attempted to contradict him in the conviction that even within the language of the underworld a poet could serve as a synergistic participant in the manifestation of &#xa0;Truth from the Light of &#xa0;Truth in the performative “production of the presence” of God. One of those who supported him in this argument was perhaps the most complex author in German history, J. G. Hamann, whom Goethe considered to be “the brightest mind of his time” and the future “forefather and teacher” of all Germans. In this context, the poetic dialogue between Celan and Bobrowski concerning the German “language after Auschwitz” could be seen as an effort to prevent its complete deontologization and to return it to the dimension of the Sacred.”</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

On the Poetic Dispute Between Paul Celan and Johannes Bobrowski

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2025年2月1日

查看全文
  • V. Kh. Gilmanov,
  • A. A. Kotilenkova

摘要

Abstract

The main purpose of this work is to explore the experience of confronting guilt “after Auschwitz” in the creative dialogue between two significant poets of the twentieth century, Paul Celan and Johannes Bobrowski. Despite their importance, their works remain inadequately studied, particularly in the context of the interaction between language and existence, or more precisely, poetic semiotics and the ontological foundation of existence. Celan, in his “Fugue of Death,” delivered the final verdict on the language of Germany after Auschwitz, declaring that Death had become the teacher of German. But Bobrowski for all his closeness to Celan in his conviction that Auschwitz proved the adocentrism of the German language, attempted to contradict him in the conviction that even within the language of the underworld a poet could serve as a synergistic participant in the manifestation of  Truth from the Light of  Truth in the performative “production of the presence” of God. One of those who supported him in this argument was perhaps the most complex author in German history, J. G. Hamann, whom Goethe considered to be “the brightest mind of his time” and the future “forefather and teacher” of all Germans. In this context, the poetic dialogue between Celan and Bobrowski concerning the German “language after Auschwitz” could be seen as an effort to prevent its complete deontologization and to return it to the dimension of the Sacred.”