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

Between 1926 and 1929, Martin Buber, Victor von Weizsäcker, and Joseph Wittig edited the journal  Die Kreatur . Its contributors included prominent authors such as Walter Benjamin, Ernst Simon, Franz Rosenzweig, Hugo Bergmann, Florens Christian Rang, and many other leading German and German-Jewish intellectuals of the early interwar period. Its very title,  Die Kreatur , programmatically suggested a new anthropology while avoiding direct theological discourse and instead fostering dialogue both between secular and religious thought and between the three religions of its editors: Judaism, Protestantism, and Catholicism. Thus, by its very nature, the journal was typical of the complex intellectual discourses that marked the Weimar period and of the “dialogic” thought that Buber and others came to stand for. Reading  Die Kreatur  as a journal poses major methodological challenges and questions not a few presuppositions of current intellectual history, which tends to focus on individual (more or less canonical) authors and their “works.” Rather than picking out single texts and constructing individual “positions,” we would be better off trying to understand  Die Kreatur  in terms of its multivocal, heterogeneous and pluralistic features. This article claims that dialogic features are characteristic of periodicals in general and constitute their productive power: they allow new ideas to emerge and institute discourses which, while lacking systematic coherence, explore new approaches and attitudes that interconnect in less rigid ways. The article makes a case for new forms of reading and conceptualizing journals – forms that will furthermore help to understand the hybrid and often idiosyncratic nature of German-Jewish discourses during the interwar period.

“Going together without coming together”: “Die Kreatur” (1926–1929) and Why We Should Read German Jewish Journals Differently