Dzieło, którego nie ma? Praktyczne (i ontologiczne) powody niedostępności Xięgi Bałwochwalczej
Journal Title: Schulz/Forum - Year 2015, Vol 5, Issue 5
Abstract
In the age of technological reproductibility the original of The Booke of Idolatry has disappeared under more and more replicas. We have been talking and writing about reproductions which are more and more distant from the original: reflections, reflexes, copies, representations, and effigies. Until today, the whole cycle of Schulz’s cliché-verres has not been published in an adequate form – there are only more successful reproductions of particular graphics. At any rate, the identity of The Booke has always been precarious and ambiguous. It has always been a work in motion – flickering, unstable, composed in various ways since particular graphics have appeared in different authorial configurations (files) each of which lead its own, independent life. Thus The Booke of Idolatry has its multiple history and no “hard” ontology. As a whole, it is not available. Still, the trouble with it begins already at the elementary level of an individual graphic. The differences among available copies have been caused by technological conditions (different chemical processing of the positives), which bring about specific material (different pace of ageing) as well as artistic consequences (replicating his cliché-verres, Schulz would choose either a sepia or a silver-black tone). As a result, different prints of the same graphic look different, which implies contingency of seeing and, what follows, also of understanding and interpretation. We may encounter The Booke of Idolatry only in its specific historical version, by coming across its individual copy. A comparison of a dozen or so preiconographic descriptions (or perhaps testimonies of looking/seeing) of the same copy of Mademoiselle Circe and Her Troupe reveals a fundamental diversity of views. Is it possible to have a debate on meaning without a consensus as regards what we can see? Is a pact concerning a visible object of the debate made (or perhaps not made?) in passing, while we interpret it in a joint effort to find its meaning?
Authors and Affiliations
Stanisław Rosiek
Keywords
Related Articles
- EP ID EP169850
- DOI -
- Views 55
- Downloads 0
Komentarz do komentarzy: Schulz edytorów
In 1989 the author edited a volume of Schulz’s fiction for the series of “Biblioteka Narodowa.” He immediately sent a copy to Jerzy Ficowski who soon responded with a long letter of March 10, 1990, including detailed rem...
Polska proza galicyjska przed wojną i po wojnie. Bruno Schulz w kontekście literatury katastrofy
Usually Schulz’s fiction is not interpreted with reference to the Holocaust and massive ethnic cleansing in East-Central Europe during World War II. The present paper is rooted in a belief that some of his later stories...
Zachwyt Ficowskiego
Schulz studies were born of rapture. In 1943 Jerzy Ficowski wrote a short study on Bruno Schulz, bound it, and titled it Regions of Great Heresy. That event can be now called the founding act of Schulz studies. Commentin...
Jerzy Ficowski o Schulzu – między rekonstrukcją a retoryką
According to the title, the author makes an attempt to reconstruct and analyze the rhetoric of Jerzy Ficowski’s works on Schulz. Since rhetoric is understood here as a way of articulating the text, in many cases it overl...
Schulzoidzi
The term “schulzoids,” coined by Igor Klech to identify the admirers of Schulz’s fiction and graphic art, who travel to Drogobych in search of the genuine cinnamon shops, has been accepted by the Schulz scholars as refer...