Laurence Hemming has a fascinating post... I'm rushed this
morning, but might I ask for more discussion about the
Nietzsche lectures and the Hoelderlin lectures from the
'30s and '40s. FRom Poggeler and others, I have read
these materials as tracing an engagement in H's thought
using N and Hoelderlin to reconsider the (yuk!) "existentialist"
or Nietzschean qualities of his own earlier thinking.
In other words, these lectures represent a *gradual* but
ultimately fundamental shift in his thinking--the so-called
Kehre.
This interpretation has become almost canonical, especially
for those of us who would like to believe that the events
around 1933 can be linked only to the errors of his
pre-Kehre thought.
I've already indicated in an earlier note that I see
most of the matieral in the Hoelderlin lectures as pre-Kehre
by my measure of things--that is, vaguely Nietzschean in
the dramatic or artistic quality of human doings.
Steve Schneck
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---
morning, but might I ask for more discussion about the
Nietzsche lectures and the Hoelderlin lectures from the
'30s and '40s. FRom Poggeler and others, I have read
these materials as tracing an engagement in H's thought
using N and Hoelderlin to reconsider the (yuk!) "existentialist"
or Nietzschean qualities of his own earlier thinking.
In other words, these lectures represent a *gradual* but
ultimately fundamental shift in his thinking--the so-called
Kehre.
This interpretation has become almost canonical, especially
for those of us who would like to believe that the events
around 1933 can be linked only to the errors of his
pre-Kehre thought.
I've already indicated in an earlier note that I see
most of the matieral in the Hoelderlin lectures as pre-Kehre
by my measure of things--that is, vaguely Nietzschean in
the dramatic or artistic quality of human doings.
Steve Schneck
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---