Letter from Stefan Morawski written 02.01.1964

Author Stefan Morawski

Category incoming correspondence, Polish researchers

Archive Archive of Science PAN and PAU in Cracow

Date of creation 2.01.1964

Reference code in archive K_III-26_D_69

Resource type letter

Subject matter academic issues, publication issues

Field phenomenology, philosophy

Tags #academic paper, #academic publications, #aesthetic semantics, #analysis of Ingarden's works, #architect, #architecture, #assistant's post, #constructionism, #creative stimuli, #doctoral thesis, #doctorate, #doubts, #editorial deadlines, #editorial office, #Franz Brentano, #functionalism, #Ingarden's phenomenology, #Ingarden's students, #Ingarden's works, #interpretative analysis, #Jadwiga Sławińska, #Mikel Dufrenne, #nationwide seminar, #Nicolai Hartmann, #phenomenological analysis, #phenomenology, #philosophical journals, #philosophical reading, #psychological talent, #resistance, #response, #response request, #Roman Ingarden, #seminar, #sensitivity of exploration, #Stefan Morawski, #Studies of Aesthetics, #University of Wrocław

1/2/1964

n Dear Professor,

n    n I am sending an article by Mrs. Sławińska, an architect and philosopher by, currently a senior assistant at the University of Wroclaw. She is pursuing a PhD in constructivism and functionalism.
n    n She sent the article to “Aesthetic Studies” – the editing board wants to publish it. I would like to ask you for a possible reply for the author. Unfortunately, because of editorial deadlines, I have to ask you to send it by January 16-17. This is the latest date possible, we are supposed to close the volume on the 15th it can only be delayed by one or two days.
n    n By the way, I have to confess I have a litany of questions for you. I have been studying your thought again for two months in relation with a nationwide seminar. We analyzed your and Dufrenne’s works.
n    n I still find a lot of creative stimuli, new doubts and points of disagreement are constantly appearing. One thing is certain – your phenomenological work is incredible hidden aesthetic “semantics” and XXX is an expression of psychological talent (I do not want to use the word “genius”), of this extraordinary sensitivity to discover hard-to-grasp phenomena and the skills of XXX. XXX me especially when I compare your works with those of his students who are still in Brentana’s school or limit themselves to ordinary interpretive analyzes. Finally – if N. Hartmann is too intellectual and N. Dufrenne is too sensitive, you manage to successfully combine both sides in your phenomenological analysis.
n    n These were – as you probably noticed see – my “fond reflections” on my recent readings, but there is also the other side of the coin. Someday I will make myself write down my list of your uncertainties and theses which I cannot recognize and share it with you.

Cordial greetings
n Stefan Morawski

P.S. Anyway, I am kindly asking for a reply and the return of the article.