Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 3 of 3 items for

  • Author or Editor: Andrea Oppo x
  • Search level: All x
Clear All

This article focuses on two significant texts revealing the crisis and stalemate of narrative during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries: Herman Melville's short tale Bartleby, The Scrivener and Samuel Beckett's Endgame. Particular attention is paid to Gilles Deleuze's and Theodor Adorno's philosophical interpretations of these two authors. Overall, the interruption and impasse of narrative are shown to happen in two radically different ways in Melville and Beckett, leading to two equally different consequences for the definition of subjectivity in contemporary aesthetics.

In: Samuel Beckett Today / Aujourd'hui
Pavel Florensky (1882–1937) was a Russian philosopher, theologian, and scientist. He was considered by his contemporaries to be a polymath on a par with Pascal or Da Vinci. This book is the first comprehensive study in the English language to examine Florensky's entire philosophical oeuvre in its key metaphysical concepts. For Florensky, antinomy and symbol are the two faces of a single issue—the universal truth of discontinuity. This truth is a general law that represents, better than any other, the innermost structure of the universe. With its original perspective, Florensky’s philosophy is unique in the context of modern Russian thought, but also in the history of philosophy per se.


Along with the crisis in the nineteenth-century ideals of egalitarianism, the early twentieth-century Russian reception of Nietzsche also elicited a negative reaction to a certain model of morality that was, for the most part, linked to Greek intellectualism and Socratic morality. As a result, a whole—and at times hidden—range of “anti-Socratic” sentiments and views spread among those authors who, in various ways and with differing conclusions, lauded Nietzsche’s critique of conventional values while comparing this critique to the Russian tradition of moral rebellion. Aside from the so-called vulgar “Nietzscheanism” (Nitssheanstvo)—i.e. a desire, which was very popular among students, for personal fulfillment and for the destruction of moral standards in the wake of Nietzsche, as divulged in Boborykin’s novels—another response to Nietzsche’s thought emerged, which considered with great seriousness the possibility of developing a new philosophical and moral consciousness, a sort of “virtuous anti-morality” that was in keeping with Nietzsche’s precepts and, often implicitly, at odds with Socrates. Among the Russian thinkers who adopted this viewpoint in the early years of the twentieth century were, above all, L. Shestov, V. Ivanov, A. Blok, and D. Merezhkovsky. This article will explore these “anti-Socratic” Russian attitudes, in particular from a philosophical point of view, i.e. starting from the claim that another morality and another “virtuous code” that differ widely from Socratic intellectualism are equally valid.

In: Socrates in Russia