Reviewed by: Martin Heidegger, Hölderlin’s Hymn “Remembrance by Martin Heidegger Véronique M. Fóti (bio) Martin Heidegger. Martin Heidegger, Hölderlin’s Hymn “Remembrance,” translated by William McNeill and Julia Ireland Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2018. 210 pages. Heidegger devoted three lecture courses, over a span of some seven years, to Hölderlin’s hymnic poetry, offering his course on Remembrance [Andenken] in the winter semester of 1941/42. His intensive and sustained engagement with Hölderlin, beginning in the early 1930’s (and thus near the conclusion of his rectorship at Freiburg University under Nazi auspices), attests to the profound impact that his encounter with Hölderlin’s poetry had on his thought—an impact still urgently in need of interpretation. Indications are that Remembrance held special importance for him. Furthermore, its exegesis in the lecture course was followed, in 1945, by the essay “Andenken” [“Remembrance”], which came to form part of his Elucidations to Hölderlin’s Poetry.” 1 One is grateful to McNeill and Ireland for their scholarly and thoughtful translation, which opens up the lecture course to Anglophone readers and which is also helpful for Anglophones seeking to participate in a needed comparative reading of both lecture course and essay. McNeill and Ireland follow the translation with an Epilogue, Translators’ Notes, and a German/English and English/German Glossary, which makes for terminological consistency. There is no index, and its absence is regrettable, but it may be a concession to Heidegger’s personal aversion to scholarly apparatus. McNeill and Ireland translate the German dichten, which verbally expresses what a poet does (and which does not figure in the Glossary) with the neologism “to poetize,” which serves also (according to the Glossary) to translate Dichtung, which is generally translated as “poetry” but has a wider scope. Although it is difficult to suggest an alternative translation, (other than perhaps leaving dichten explicated but untranslated, given that English lacks an equivalent verb), “to poetize” is problematic. It inappropriately suggests a secondary activity carried out with the materials of language, whereas Heidegger holds that dichten and Dichtung characterize the originary character of language which, moreover, enables the poetic dwelling of mortals upon the earth. [End Page 795] In contrast to the essay “Remembrance,”2 which is densely argued and brings into focus Heidegger’s, by this date, key concern with essential historicity (Seinsgeschichte), leading him to interlace the poet’s diction with his own articulation, the lecture course is, though similarly focused, more wide-ranging and also more defensive or tentative. It prominently addresses questions of language and of the perils of inadequate bases for interpretation. It also includes, besides discussions of Hölderlin’s two important letters to Casimir Ulrich von Böhlendorff, framing his 1801/02 journey to Bordeaux, consideration of Sophocles and Pindar (both of whom Hölderlin translated). One discerns in the lecture course Heidegger’s striving to articulate, in dialogue with Hölderlin, what was truly at issue for him, treating Hölderin’s Dichtung as preparatory for (but not equivalent to) his own task of thinking. In the poem’s first two strophes, Heidegger focuses, in the lecture course, on the reciprocities and distances involved in greeting, and on an essential (if esoteric) understanding of holidays and festivity. In particular, he highlights how holidays (or “days of celebration”) call attention to the sheer “miracle” of being (often written in the pre-contemporary spelling of Seyn, which Hölderlin still used quite naturally), rather than non-being, as well as of the arising of world-configurations. The festivity (Fest) thus prepared for reveals itself as the essentiality (Wesen) of history (section 27:2). Hölderlin’s poetic articulation anticipates and guides, for Heidegger, his own understanding of Seinsgeschichte. He finds an important basis in Hölderlin’s “Empedocles complex” (three fragmentary tragedies and a corpus of theoretical essays, dating roughly to the last three years of the 18th century), in which the poet reasons that the free use of a culture’s ownmost gift (which is, for Hesperia or the West, the clarity of presentation) must laboriously be acquired through an immersion into what is alien, (such as the Greek “fire...
Read full abstract