Letter from Stanisław Ignacy Witkiewicz written 23.03.1938

Author Stanisław Ignacy Witkiewicz

Category incoming correspondence, Polish researchers

Archive Ingarden Family archives

Date of creation 23.03.1938

Reference code in archive ARI

Resource type letter

Subject matter academic issues, personal issues

Field philosophy

Tags #academic work, #brochure, #criticism of Metallman, #Daniela Gromska, #Hans Cornelius, #hauptwerk, #idealism, #Issues of the Philosophical Review, #Jan Leszczyński, #Jan Świderski, #Joachim Metallmann, #Kazimierz Ajdukiewicz, #Kazimierz Twardowski, #lecture, #lecturing activity, #manuscript, #Philosophical Movement, #philosophical polemics, #Philosophical Review, #philosophical study, #polemics, #polemics with Leszczyński, #reply to review, #review, #Roman Ingarden, #Stanisław Ignacy Witkiewicz, #summary, #Witkacy

23.III 1938
Honoured and Dear Professor:
Thank you very much for the brochure, which I still have not read. Thank you also for the letter. I am currently under such an intense sturm and drang [German: storm and stress] in life, that I do not know how I will get out of it. For now, philosophical studies and writings are on track as planned, interrupted by salaried work and “private life”. Cornelius writes that neither you nor Ajdukiewicz responded to the remarks he made upon request. He suspects that both of you are offended and he is very worried about it. My polemic with Leszczynski about idealism has come to an end. To his supposedly “devastating attack” I replied with a 66-page letter per calco [through the calque – an expression of Witkacy’s invention], to which he sent me a private 8-page letter which was hopeless. Szlus [phonetic rendering of German “Schluss” – the end]. We arrived at assumptions, but they are stuck in his fantasy, and mine sind in der Realitӓt fundiert [are founded in reality], please Sir – that’s what. As for this “Ruch” [“Movement”] journal, it is a strange thing. I got a card from Ms. Daniela (!) Gromska (I have the impression that she is “hairy” under her dress, gray with white spots) with the demand for a summary of my paper. I replied that the thing will come out in full length in one of the upcoming Iss [issues] of the Ph[ilosophical] R[eview], but I added the question of what was happening with Metallmann’s review of my short work, with my proposal to publish the answer (already written) in the same is[sue] of “R[uch]” [“Movement”] and with my summary of the previous paper (hochinteressant [very interesting]), which I sent at the request of Twardowski. These are mysterious things that I would like you to examine. Metallmann is waiting for the publication from Is[ssue] to Is[sue] – and it turns out that it is not known where it is!! Thank you for everything. If you will be able to send me back my MS, I will be very grateful. I wrote a review of Świderski. Difficult piece.
ERFB [I enclose words of respect and friendship for you both] F.G. [family greetings] 3W [Your faithful Witkacy].