Letter to Irena Krońska written in 22.05.1954

Krakow, 5/22/1954


    c     Dear Ms. Irena,

    c           c     Upon my return home from the city, wherefrom I sent a letter to the Committee with the rest of the corrections for Spinoza’s Ethics, I found your letter from May 19. Therefore, I would like to reply to said letter, which I thank you very much for.
    c            I have somehow managed with paper for now. I introduce corrections on those pages of the typescript that are not too bad. I do rewrite the worst as well as all new footnotes. I do it myself for now, because the person who was supposed to rewrite it for me is busy for now. Maybe they will have the time next week. I can re-check some things on the typing machine myself, restore the original text in some places, etc., so it is not without its advantages, but unfortunately it progresses very slowly. I did 35 pages in five days and would like to send 332. But maybe I will get some help later, and there are fewer corrections in the remainder of the typescript. The second preface is the most problematic. In any case, I am trying to meet the deadline.
    c            As I wrote, the date of the meeting of the 16th IV. he is answering me just in case I am asking for official notification, because something can always change.

    c            As for the dissertation on the latest translations, I have two ready works that are basically finished: “On the difficulties of translating the works of philosophy classics”, which I once read at a Committee meeting” and “On the difference between translating an artistic work and translating a scientific work”. The latter would have to be supplemented with concrete examples. I have said it twice. I have said it twice and I have prepared examples, but I did not feel like writing it. But the examples are only from translations from German, because, as far as other languages go, ​​I am afraid of not trusting my literary knowledge of French or English. In addition, the examples are derived from translations of various different materials /prose and poems by Rilke, who is probably now politically inconvenient, but I used him because I thought I understood him quite well. I could also use Geothe’s translations /e.g. Faust or something poetical/, but I would still have to compile it. Now, I hardly even have the time to write down the examples I have ready to go, because I must finally get done with that filth, excuse me, with “Critique”. Together both dissertations have about 80 pages, except adding examples can increase them by another 20 pages or so.
    c            But I doubt I should propose it at all. Both of these works should be printed together, because only in juxtaposition do they gain a certain level of meaning /the second one more theoretical, discusses extensively the functions of language, the differences in the structure of a scientific and literary work/. Both papers are built based on my concept of literary works – they are also a test of this concept. But, as you know, it is “unscientific,” so cui bono should I actually be exposing it to the “scientific” attacks. I am not desperate to print them at all. As I have recently mentioned, I have published over 4,000 pages of philosophical works, 1/4 in foreign languages. It is enough for me for now, the rest will remain for the “Nachlass” / some specialists would actually do so, and even that I care little about /. So, I am not eager to send anything in for now. But since you asked, I shall answer: these I have ready, and I am willing to submit both together if they can be received as they are. It would be necessary to add examples, otherwise the whole is not very illustrative. Hence, I could only deliver in a while. Anyway, I am now so far away from literature that it is like a different incarnation.
    c            So much for now. I send you my cordial regards and just please let me know what you think about this whole matter and if you are for or against.