{"title":"Autorschaft问题","authors":"Arne Klawitter","doi":"10.1515/iasl-2020-0001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract When Schubart’s Lehrbuch der schönen Wissenschaften was published in 1777, the supposed author distanced himself from the work, complaining that the edition by one of his students had reduced it to a “skeleton.” In 1781, the philosopher Michael Hißmann published a revised edition of this book with many additional explanations and references of his own. The following article reconstructs the impact of this book and the history of its reception, comparing the two different versions published by the two dissimilar editors and questions the hermeneutical intention to identify Schubart’s own aesthetic principles and positions.","PeriodicalId":42506,"journal":{"name":"INTERNATIONALES ARCHIV FUR SOZIALGESCHICHTE DER DEUTSCHEN LITERATUR","volume":"45 1","pages":"1 - 20"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2020-06-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/iasl-2020-0001","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Problematische Autorschaft\",\"authors\":\"Arne Klawitter\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/iasl-2020-0001\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract When Schubart’s Lehrbuch der schönen Wissenschaften was published in 1777, the supposed author distanced himself from the work, complaining that the edition by one of his students had reduced it to a “skeleton.” In 1781, the philosopher Michael Hißmann published a revised edition of this book with many additional explanations and references of his own. The following article reconstructs the impact of this book and the history of its reception, comparing the two different versions published by the two dissimilar editors and questions the hermeneutical intention to identify Schubart’s own aesthetic principles and positions.\",\"PeriodicalId\":42506,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"INTERNATIONALES ARCHIV FUR SOZIALGESCHICHTE DER DEUTSCHEN LITERATUR\",\"volume\":\"45 1\",\"pages\":\"1 - 20\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-06-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/iasl-2020-0001\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"INTERNATIONALES ARCHIV FUR SOZIALGESCHICHTE DER DEUTSCHEN LITERATUR\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/iasl-2020-0001\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LITERATURE, GERMAN, DUTCH, SCANDINAVIAN\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"INTERNATIONALES ARCHIV FUR SOZIALGESCHICHTE DER DEUTSCHEN LITERATUR","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/iasl-2020-0001","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LITERATURE, GERMAN, DUTCH, SCANDINAVIAN","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
摘要
当Schubart的《Lehrbuch der schönen Wissenschaften》于1777年出版时,这位被认为是作者的人与这部作品保持距离,抱怨说他的一个学生的版本把它简化成了一个“骨架”。1781年,哲学家迈克尔·希曼(Michael Hißmann)出版了这本书的修订版,其中增加了许多他自己的解释和参考资料。下面的文章重构了这本书的影响和它的接受历史,比较了两个不同的编辑出版的两个不同的版本,并质疑解释学的意图,以确定舒巴特自己的美学原则和立场。
Abstract When Schubart’s Lehrbuch der schönen Wissenschaften was published in 1777, the supposed author distanced himself from the work, complaining that the edition by one of his students had reduced it to a “skeleton.” In 1781, the philosopher Michael Hißmann published a revised edition of this book with many additional explanations and references of his own. The following article reconstructs the impact of this book and the history of its reception, comparing the two different versions published by the two dissimilar editors and questions the hermeneutical intention to identify Schubart’s own aesthetic principles and positions.