As Schmitt pointed out, the discussion of ‘Romanticism’ is itself usually ‘Romantic.’ Very hard to recognize much of what the actual Romantics said and thought in this kind of account. Girard is a worthy thinker but is hardly a reliable source on the thought of others.
It’s from ‘Political Romanticism’ and would be difficult to summarize here (i can send you the relevant passages if you’re interested), but the essential idea is that Romanticism refuses precise historical causality and definition in favor of “occasion.” I love Girard’s first book but I think he could be fairly accused of this sort of thinking.
As Schmitt pointed out, the discussion of ‘Romanticism’ is itself usually ‘Romantic.’ Very hard to recognize much of what the actual Romantics said and thought in this kind of account. Girard is a worthy thinker but is hardly a reliable source on the thought of others.
Very interesting. Where did he write that, and what did he mean by it?
It’s from ‘Political Romanticism’ and would be difficult to summarize here (i can send you the relevant passages if you’re interested), but the essential idea is that Romanticism refuses precise historical causality and definition in favor of “occasion.” I love Girard’s first book but I think he could be fairly accused of this sort of thinking.
Cool yeah I'd be curious to see the relevant passages and maybe to read the book
I’ll pull some passages when i get the chance
I’m sorry to be so vague but Schmitt is hard to summarize!
that was quick!