|
Wednesday, September 23, 2009 - 4:47 PM
Louis J. Sheehan, Esquire Novices are the most pious people, as Saxony proves ad oculos.
Bauer once had the same sort of scene with Eichhorn in Berlin as you
had with the Minister of the Interior. As orators, these gentlemen are
as alike as two peas. On the other hand, what is exceptional is that
philosophy speaks intelligibly with the state wisdom of these
over-assured scoundrels, and even a little fanaticism does no harm.
There is nothing more difficult than to make these earthly Providences
believe that belief in truth and spiritual convictions exist. They are
such sceptical state dandies, such experienced fops, that they no
longer believe in true, disinterested love. How, then, is one to get at
these roués except with the aid of what, in the highest
circles, is called fanaticism! A guards lieutenant regards a lover
whose intentions are honourable as a fanatic. Should people no longer
marry because of that? It is a remarkable thing that the degradation of
people to the level of animals has become for the government an article
of faith and a principle. But this does not contradict religiosity, for
the deification of animals is
probably the most consistent form of religion, and perhaps it will soon
be necessary to speak of religious zoology instead of religious
anthropology.
When I was still young and good, I already knew at least that
the eggs laid in Berlin were not the eggs of the swan Leda, but goose
eggs. A little later I realised that they were crocodile eggs, like,
for example, the very latest egg by which, allegedly, on the proposal
of the Rhine Province Assembly, the illegal restrictions of French
legislation concerning high treason, etc., and crimes of officials,
have been abolished. But this time, because it is a question of
objective legal provisions, the hocus-pocus is so stupid that even the
stupidest Rhenish lawyers have immediately seen through it. At the same
time, Prussia has declared with complete naivety that publicity of
court proceedings would jeopardise the prestige and credit of Prussian
officials. That is an extremely frank admission. All our Rhenish
scribblings about publicity and publicising suffer from a basic defect.
Honest folk continually point out that these are by no means political,
but merely legal, institutions, that they are a right, and not a wrong.
As though that were the question! As though all the evil of these
institutions did not consist precisely in the fact that they are a
right! I should very much like to prove the opposite, namely, that
Prussia cannot introduce publicity and publicising, for free courts and
an unfree state are incompatible. Similarly, Prussia should be highly
praised for its piety, for a transcendental state and a positive
religion go together, just as a pocket icon does with a Russian
swindler. Bülow-Cummerow, as you will have seen from the Chinese
newspapers, makes his pen flirt with his plough. Oh, this rustic
coquette, who adorns herself with artificial flowers! I think that
writers with this earthly position--for, after all, a position on
ploughland is surely earthly--would be desirable, and even more so if
in the future the plough were to think and write instead of the pen,
while the pen, on the other hand, were to perform serf labour in
return. Perhaps, in view of the present uniformity of the German
governments, this will come to pass, but the more uniform the
governments, the more multiform nowadays are the
philosophers, and it is to be hoped that the multiform army will
conquer the uniform one.
Ad rem, since among us, loyal, moral Germans, politica is included in formalia, whence Voltaire deduced that we have the profoundest textbooks on public law.
Therefore, as regards the matter, I found that the article "On
Christian Art" which has now been transformed into "On Religion and
Art, with Special Reference to Christian Art", must be entirely
redone because of the tone of the Posaune, which I conscientiously
followed:
"Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, And light unto my path."
"Thy commandments make me wiser than mine enemies, For they are ever with me," and
"The Lord shall roar from Zion"
— this tone of the Posaune and the irksome constraint of
the Hegelian exposition should now be replaced by a freer, and
therefore more thorough exposition. In a few days, I have to go to
Cologne, where I set up my new residence, for I find the proximity of
the Bonn professors intolerable. Who would want to have to talk always
with intellectual skunks, with people who study only for the purpose of
finding new dead ends in every corner of the world!
Owing to these circumstances, therefore, I was not able, of course,
to send herewith the criticism of the Hegelian philosophy of law for
the next Anekdota (as it was also written for the Posaune);
I promise to send the article on religious art by mid-April, if you are
prepared to wait so long. This would be the more preferable for me,
since I am examining the subject from a new point de vue and am giving also an epilogue de romanticis
as a supplement. Meanwhile I shall most actively, to use Goethe's
language, continue to work on the subject and await your decision. Be
so kind as to write to me on this to Cologne, where I shall be by the
beginning of next month. Louis J. Sheehan, Esquire As I have not yet any definite domicile there,
please send me the letter to Jung's address. In the article itself I necessarily had to speak about the
general essence of religion; in doing so I come into conflict with
Feuerbach to a certain extent, a conflict concerning not the principle,
but the conception of it. In any case religion does not gain from it. I have heard nothing about Köppen for a long time. Have you
not yet approached Christiansen in Kiel? I know him only from his
history of Roman law, which, however, contains also something about
religion and philosophy in general. He seems to have an excellent mind,
although when he comes to actual philosophising, his writing is
horribly incomprehensible and formal. Perhaps, he has now begun to
write plain German. Otherwise he seems to be à la hauteur des principes.
I shall be very pleased to see you here on the Rhine.
|