English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

pathologies explored in the book’s final four chapters on Werther, Anton Reiser, Wilhelm Meister, and Die Wahlverwandtschaften. An intervening chapter on trauma in the seventeenth century, presented here with what the editors nicely call the “Mut zum Fragment” (15), explores the genre of the Protestant Leichenpredigt which flowered from the end of the sixteenth into the eighteenth centuries and has bloomed again more recently in scholarship inspired no doubt in part by Kowalik’s work (Niekus Moore, Kobelt-Groch). Drawing on work by Jonathan Shay on combat trauma, Kowalik proposes to examine trauma, particularly after the Thirty Years’ War, in Leichenpredigten measured in terms of one of its universal features: rage. “The question before us,” she writes, “is not whether trauma occurred—thousands of victims have testified that it did—but what the quality of trauma was and what kinds of mechanisms evolved that did or did not allow victims to come to terms with extraordinary violence, injury, and loss” (96). Unlike much recent historical and theoretical work on early modern Europeans’ practices of spiritual and bodily mortification, particularly among mystics (de Certeau, Hollywood, Strasser, Temme), Kowalik hardly shies from moral judgments of the book’s actors. Leading Pietists come away particularly badly. We read, for example, that unlike in England, “across the channel Francke’s orphanage in Halle was exploiting child labor, abusing its charges, and creating depressives at an astonishing rate—and, worse, it was becoming the model for Prussia as a whole” (34). Her introduction intriguingly proposes that absolutism required this affective regime and suggests that her work should be read as a contribution to “The History of Central European Sadism” (25). While the work on the Leichenpredigt does not here bear this out, the proposition demands further attention. It certainly might be explored profitably in readings of Trauerspiele, epicedia, and other lyric forms missing altogether from these pages. Recent years have witnessed vigorous study of historical affect (Sabean and Medick, Roper, Rublack, and others) and of trauma (Scarry, Hermann, Caruth, LaCapra, Butler, and others). One will look in vain in the pages of Theology and Dehumanization for most of these references. One must mourn what might have been created had Kowalik been able to read them—or to consult comparative studies, such as Jill Lepore’s The Name of War. Yet, in seeing Kowalik’s essays into print, Hart, Mahlendorf, Saine, and Medick have provided valuable thought for later readers. Hardly only troubled waters, these pages are also remarkably rich. May the talent of their future navigators equal that of their source.

<i>Analytical Psychology and German Classical Aesthetics: Goethe, Schiller, and Jung</i> (review)