Abstract

Pričujoči sestavek skuša ovrednotiti Gadamerjevo knjigo o Celanu glede njenega prispevka k fenomenologiji. Gadamer se zateče k poeziji kot fenomenološkemu orodju zaradi uvida, da fenomenologija ne more biti metoda in da lahko fenomen, bit, dosežemo le prek nenadnega prebliska, z »gnomično prezenco«. Pesnik s »pretresom« trdno uveljavljene kulturne ideje in pogleda na realnost omogoča uvid, da je »normativnost« samo ena omejena perspektiva realnosti in da so drugi vidiki potlačeni. Resnica, ki naj bi prišla na dan prek pesnika, je končna časovna bit človeške eksistence, kar pomeni, da vsaka perspektiva hkrati odkriva in zakriva samo realnost. Težava je v tem, da pesniku ne preostane nič drugega, kot da se zateče k utečeni rabi jezika. Od tu izhajata Celanov pesimizem in dvomi glede možnosti doseganja resnice prek poezije. Gadamer pa je na drugi strani videti optimističen in se drži prepričanja, »prvega načela«, da je fenomen s poezijo mogoče doseči. Tu raste napetost med fenomenologijo kot »nenadnim« dogodkom, eshatologijo in kot metodo.The aim of this paper is to evaluate the contribution of Gadamer’s Celanbook to phenomenology. Seeing that phenomenology cannot be a method and the phenomenon, the Being, can be achieved only by a sudden lightening, by “gnomic presence”, Gadamer turns to poetry as the phenomenological means. The poet, by “shaking up” one’s cultural fixed idea and perspective in regarding reality, enables one to see that the “normative” is only one limited perspective of it, while other aspects are being suppressed. The truth, which is supposed to come to light through the poet, is the finite temporal Being of the human existence, which means that each perspective of reality discovers it and covers it at the same time. The problem is that the poet has no better device to do it than the standard usages of language. Here lies the pessimism of Celan, his doubt as to the possibility of achieving truth through poetry. Gadamer, on the other hand, seems to be optimistic and holds to his opinion, to his “first principle”, that the phenomenon can be achieved in poetry. Here lies the tension between the phenomenology as a “sudden” event, as eschatology, and as a method.