Past Events

Werner Herzog’s Post-Tragic Aesthetic: a Kierkegaardian Perspective 1024 943 Tom Carlson

Werner Herzog’s Post-Tragic Aesthetic: a Kierkegaardian Perspective

January 11, 2019 at 10 a.m.

Robertson Gymnasium 1000A

Many of Werner Herzog’s films portray protagonists who exhibit forms of subjectivity that dangerously overflow the conditions imposed by the substantial determinants of nature, family, and state. In this respect, as I will argue, Herzog presents an implicit philosophical claim in his films, namely, that today we inhabit a post-tragic mentality. This vision is one shared by the Danish philosopher Søren Kierkegaard, who proposed that ‘our age has lost the tragic,’ later adding that ‘when the age loses the tragic, it gains despair.’ In this presentation, I will examine how, in a Kierkegaardian fashion, Herzog’s distinctive aesthetic reveals the perils of a post-tragic mentality. More specifically, my claim is that archetypal Herzogian protagonists represent various attempts to eschew the tragic tension between suffering and action, often becoming either demonically charged or comically delusional in the process.

To categorize the demonic type, I will examine Don Lope de Aguirre, who mismanages his immediate relation to substantial determinants by refusing to acknowledge the recalcitrance of milieu, causation, and fate. This refusal leads Aguirre to increasingly demonic assertions of his will, manifest as rage against the world, ending in madness and the destruction of his entire expedition. To categorize the comic type, I will examine Timothy Treadwell, who mismanages his immediate relation to substantial determinants by attempting to ‘assert his subjectivity in pure form,’ ignoring his inherent status as a human being who must submit to the obvious forces of a purely brutish domain.

I will conclude by suggesting that the films of Werner Herzog provide a salutary lesson concerning the presence of tragic elements in all human understanding and action, despite the fervent wish of late-moderns to ignore the forces that impinge upon the individual. It is a wish that appears to culminate in demonic self-destruction or comic insignificance.

Reading

Kierkegaard, S., ‘The Tragic in Ancient Drama Reflected in the Tragic in Modern Drama,’ in Either/Or: Part 1, Eds. and Trans. Howard V. Hong and Edna H. Hong, Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press (1987), pp. 137-164.

Recommended Viewing

Aguirre, the Wrath of God (1972)

Grizzly Man (2005)*

*Will be screened on Thursday, January 10, 2019, at 5 p.m., Robertson Gymnasium 1000A

Public Lecture by Robert Pogue Harrison: Pondus Amoris 1024 1024 Tom Carlson

Public Lecture by Robert Pogue Harrison: Pondus Amoris

October 25, 2018 at 4 p.m.

Robertson Gymnasium 1000A 

Saint Augustine famously declared, “my weight is my love [pondus meum amor meus]. Wherever I am carried by it, it is this weight that carries me.” The prevailing Romanic conception of music sees it as seraphic and fire-like in nature, seeking to rise into the ether of pure spirit. In this talk, Robert Pogue Harrison argues for the primordiality of gravity over levitation, using music to make his case for the intrinsic heaviness of the human condition.

Robert Pogue Harrison is Rosina Pierotti Professor in Italian Literature at Stanford University. He is the author of Forests: The Shadow of Civilization (1992); The Dominion of the Dead (2005); Gardens: an Essay on the Human Condition (2008); and Juvenesecence: a Cultural History of Our Age (2014).

Seminar with Robert Pogue Harrison: Amor Mundi 150 150 Tom Carlson

Seminar with Robert Pogue Harrison: Amor Mundi

October 26, 2018 at 1-4 p.m.

Robertson Gymnasium 1000A 

Through a discussion of “Amor Mundi,” the final chapter of Harrison’s 2014 work Juvenescence: A Cultural History of Our Age, this seminar will consider the mission of education in the humanities today—focusing on the relation of such education to Harrison’s central claim that “it takes a great deal of love—what Hannah Arendt, borrowing a phrase from Saint Augustine, called amor mundi—to take the well-being of the world to heart and commit oneself to assuring it continuity through the generations. It is that love, and that love alone, that takes custody of the world’s future.

Robert Pogue Harrison is Rosina Pierotti Professor in Italian Literature at Stanford University. He is the author of Forests: The Shadow of Civilization (1992); The Dominion of the Dead (2005); Gardens: an Essay on the Human Condition (2008); and Juvenesecence: a Cultural History of Our Age (2014).

From Anxiety to Boredom: Kierkegaard, Heidegger, and the Secularization of Anxiety in Existentialist Thought 150 150 Tom Carlson

From Anxiety to Boredom: Kierkegaard, Heidegger, and the Secularization of Anxiety in Existentialist Thought

November 30, 2018 at 1 p.m.

Robertson Gymnasium 1000A 

While Kierkegaard conceives of anxiety as the psychological presupposition of the dogma of original sin, and while Heidegger himself draws heavily on Kierkegaard in that he places anxiety at the center of his magnum opus Being and Time (1927), Heidegger nonetheless purposefully disregards the concept of sin (along with his indebtedness to Kierkegaard) throughout this work, restricting instead his analysis to guilt, that is, to the experience of sinfulness. This accords with the widely received line of interpretation according to which Heidegger appropriates Kierkegaard’s teachings by way of secularization. It has been largely overlooked, however, that Heidegger further secularizes his own concept of anxiety when in a crucial moment in the development of his thought, namely in his lecture course from the winter semester of 1929/30, entitled, “The Fundamental Concepts of Metaphysics,” he chooses to philosophize about boredom instead of anxiety, now disregarding no only sin but also guilt and fear, and thereby demonstrating, albeit without making this insight explicit, the guiltless and fearless nature of boredom, while at the same time revealing important aspects of boredom’s formal resemblance to anxiety.

Avraham Rot is a junior fellow at the Maimonides Centre for Advanced Studies in Hamburg. He has a PhD in intellectual history from Johns Hopkins University, and has been a junior visiting fellow at the Institute for Human Sciences in Vienna and a postdoctoral fellow at Johns Hopkins University and at the Freie Universität Berlin. He currently teaches philosophy and intellectual history at Johns Hopkins University and George Washington University.

God and the Science of Emotion, or A Spinozist Answer to the Question: “Why Did the Affective Turn Take Place?” 150 150 Tom Carlson

God and the Science of Emotion, or A Spinozist Answer to the Question: “Why Did the Affective Turn Take Place?”

November 29, 2018 at 4 p.m.

Robertson Gymnasium 1000A 

Recent decades have witnessed an upsurge of interest in emotional phenomena. But while the emotions themselves have been extensively studied, the very fact that there has been such a tremendous increase of interest in them remains underexplored and the explanations that have nonetheless been given to account for it are, as a rule, partial, circumstantial, circular or other unsatisfactory. Here I propose an alternative explanation to this second-order phenomenon based on Spinoza’s metaphysics, in the framework of which finitude is regarded not as a monolithic term, as is customary, but as a matter of degree, and the emotions are conceived as secondary affections of God, i.e., particularly finite beings. The growing fascination with the emotions is accordingly explicable in terms of a growing fascination with the finite, a process that accounts for the historical emergence of the sciences as it leads from theology, through physics and chemistry, as well as the life, human, and social sciences, to, most recently, the science of emotion, the science of the infinitely small.

Avraham Rot is a junior fellow at the Maimonides Centre for Advanced Studies in Hamburg. He has a PhD in intellectual history from Johns Hopkins University, and has been a junior visiting fellow at the Institute for Human Sciences in Vienna and a postdoctoral fellow at Johns Hopkins University and at the Freie Universität Berlin. He currently teaches philosophy and intellectual history at Johns Hopkins University and George Washington University.

Seminar with Jonathan Lear: Gettysburg Mourning 1003 816 Nina Rismal

Seminar with Jonathan Lear: Gettysburg Mourning

December 6, 2018 at 3 p.m.

Robertson Gymnasium 1000A

John U. Nef Distinguished Service Professor at the Committee on Social Thought and in the Department of Philosophy; Roman Family Director of the Neubauer Collegium for Culture and society at the University of Chicago; and Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. Lear works primarily on philosophical conceptions of the human psyche from Scorates to the present. His publications include Radical Hope: Ethics in the Face of Cultural Devastation (2006) and, most recently, The Idea of a Philosophical Anthropology (2017) and Wisdom Won from Illness: Essays in Philosophy and Psychoanalysis (2017).

Krise, Kritik und Zukunft des Sozialstaats 724 1024 Susann Schmeisser

Krise, Kritik und Zukunft des Sozialstaats

Im Rahmen der Reihe „Critical Theory in Context“ (Lehrstuhl für Sozialphilosophie/Center for Humanities and Social Change, HU Berlin) diskutieren Claus Offe (Professor Emeritus of Political Sociology an der Hertie School of Governance) und Stephan Lessenich (Professor an der Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München) Fragen nach der Krise, Kritik und Zukunft des Sozialstaates. Die Veranstaltung findet am 09.01.2019 von 18-21 Uhr in der Vierten Welt statt, der Eintritt ist frei.

Berlin, 9. Januar 2019: Krise, Kritik und Zukunft des Sozialstaats.

Der Sozialstaat bildet in institutioneller und normativer Hinsicht ein zentrales Element moderner westlicher Gesellschaften. Seine Herausbildung stellte historisch betrachtet einen enormen sozialen Fortschritt dar: Mit der Einführung sozialer Bürgerrechte und Sicherungsleistungen wurde den Bürgern ein Anspruch auf ein Mindestmaß an sozialer Gleichheit und Teilhabe gewährt und so einem krassen Pauperismus entgegengewirkt. Als eine Vermittlungsinstanz zwischen Demokratie und Kapitalismus trägt der Sozialstaat damit sowohl zur sozialen Integration in die Gesellschaft als auch zum funktionsfähigen Zusammenwirken der verschiedenen Gesellschaftsbereiche bei.

Nun befindet sich der Sozialstaat schon länger in einer Krise, die nicht zuletzt auch von einer von links geäußerten Kritik gegenüber ihm mitgetragen wurde. Dies erklärt sich unter anderem dadurch, dass viele der Errungenschaften, die das wohlfahrtsstaatliche Arrangement bot, aufs Engste mit negativen Folgen verbunden waren. So etwa gehörten zur sozialen Sicherung und Integration immer schon Mechanismen der sozialen Kontrolle, Normierung, Standardisierung und des Ausschlusses von bestimmten Teilen der Bevölkerung. Hinzu treten neue Herausforderungen im Zuge einer neoliberalen Umgestaltung und globalisierten Welt, die die normative Institution des Sozialstaats in ihrer Geltung aushöhlen und infrage stellen. Gewachsene Problemlagen und sozialstaatliche Lösungsangebote geraten so immer mehr in ein Missverhältnis, das die Frage nahelegt, ob es sich bei dem Sozialstaat um ein historisch ‚überlebtes‘ Gebilde handelt oder nicht doch die Notwendigkeit besteht, diesen – und seine emanzipatorischen Aspekte – zu verteidigen und dabei neu zu denken.

Barrikadengespräch: Aneignung und Enteignung: Zur Wohnungsfrage 738 1024 Susann Schmeisser

Barrikadengespräch: Aneignung und Enteignung: Zur Wohnungsfrage

Auseinandersetzungen darüber, wie überhaupt noch sichergestellt werden kann, dass Häuser bewohnbar oder Mieten bezahlbar bleiben. Damit aber sind ganz generelle Fragen angesprochen: Was macht es aus unseren Städten, wenn Wohnraum immer unumschränkter zur Ware wird? Wie legitim ist das Eigentumsverhältnis in Bezug auf Grundgüter und öffentliche Güter überhaupt? Zur Debatte stehen aber auch konkrete politische Handlungsspielräume: Wie lässt sich die im Grundgesetz festgehaltene Gemeinwohlbindung des Eigentums konkret institutionell durchsetzen? Und welche Erfahrungen gibt es mit Maßnahmen gegen die Verdrängung von Bewohnerinnen aus ihren Vierteln?

Berlin, 19 December 2018: Barrikadengespräch: Aneignung und Enteignung: Zur Wohnungsfrage.

Bei unserem Barrikadengespräch bringen wir eine einzigartige Gesprächskonstellation zusammen. Jenny Weyel aus New York wird das von ihr verantwortete Pilotprojekt gegen Mieter-Verdrängung der New Yorker Stadtverwaltung vorstellen und mit Canan Bayram, der direkt gewählten grünen Bundestagsabgeordneten für Friedrichshain-Kreuzberg und Prenzlauer Berg (Ost), über die progressivsten Vorstöße in der Berliner Wohnungspolitik diskutieren. Daniel Loick, derzeit Fellow am HSC Berlin Center, kommentiert den Austausch vor dem Hintergrund seiner Überlegungen zu einer Theorie der Ent-Aneignung.

Organisiert von: Rahel Jaeggi und Eva von Redecker (Center for Humanities and Social Change, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin)

Mediterranea: civil society in defence of human rights 1024 724 Barbara Del Mercato

Mediterranea: civil society in defence of human rights

Alessandra Sciurba (University of Palermo) and Lucia Gennari (lawyer, ASGI) discuss with Sara De Vido (Ca’ Foscari University of Venice) and Shaul Bassi (HSC Venice) about the genesis and development of the Mediterranea project. 

Venice, 30/11/2018 at 8.45 a.m.

Mediterranea-Saving Humans is a project, network, and “Non Governmental Action” created to monitor and report from the central Mediterranean, defying the silence surrounding the migrants’ death toll at sea. Which principles animate Mediterranea? How does it work? What is the legal framework sustaining its action? How was it possible to buy a ship and operate it? The event is in English, hosted by a class of international students. Everybody is welcome.

Admission free
Event in English

Rai3 Veneto news broadcast on Mediterranea hosted by HSC Venice

Short interviews to Shaul Bassi, Sara De Vido, Lucia Gennari and Alessandra Sciurba on Ca’ Foscari University’s website

Problems of Property 720 1018 Susann Schmeisser

Problems of Property

Property is a key institution both in the capitalist economy and in liberal political orders. Property law regulates access to material goods as well as symbolic status, it is seen as the foundation for personal liberty and political legitimacy, and it mediates our relation to the world of objects.

Berlin, 17-18 December 2018: Problems of Property.

While many critical discussions concern the question of the distribution of goods, this workshop investigates problems arising with the specific form and function given to property in modernity.

How to account for the social ontology and societal function of property? What is the genealogy of the modern, Western understanding of property and which shifts can we observe in the present? How paradigmatic are notions of ownership to concepts of personhood and subjective rights? Could the emancipatory potential of property be preserved without prolonging the dispossession and domination implicated by it?

Speakers include: Carol Rose, Silke van Dyk, Daniel Loick, Bertram Lomfeld

Organized by: Rahel Jaeggi and Eva von Redecker (Humboldt University Berlin)