melania_010200's review against another edition
1.0
1/5 Nothing here for me...
Nu știam de tema preponderent religioasă a eseurilor . La asta s-a adăugat modul opac al eseistului de-a tratat majoritatea subiectelor plus unele teme sau întrebări care m-au lăsat de-a dreptul fără cuvinte. Adică, de ce, de ce, de ce te-ar interesa dacă Isus avea scaun ( si nu, nu la cap) sau ce o sa se întâmple cu trupurile copiilor canibalilor după inviere?
In fine, a avut 150 de pagini , deci n-am pierdut asa mult timp . Am luat-o de la reduceri, deci n-am pierdut asa mulți bani .
Nu știam de tema preponderent religioasă a eseurilor . La asta s-a adăugat modul opac al eseistului de-a tratat majoritatea subiectelor plus unele teme sau întrebări care m-au lăsat de-a dreptul fără cuvinte. Adică, de ce, de ce, de ce te-ar interesa dacă Isus avea scaun ( si nu, nu la cap) sau ce o sa se întâmple cu trupurile copiilor canibalilor după inviere?
In fine, a avut 150 de pagini , deci n-am pierdut asa mult timp . Am luat-o de la reduceri, deci n-am pierdut asa mulți bani .
jacob_wren's review against another edition
Giorgio Agamben writes:
The ones who can call themselves contemporary are only those who do not allow themselves to be blinded by the lights of the century and so manage to get a glimpse of the shadows in those lights, of their intimate obscurity. Having said this much, we have nevertheless still not addressed our question. Why should we be at all interested in perceiving the obscurity that emanates from the epoch? Is darkness not precisely an anonymous experience that is by definition impenetrable, something that is not directed at us and thus cannot concern us? On the contrary, the contemporary is the person who perceives the darkness of his time as something that concerns him, as something that never ceases to engage him. Darkness is something that – more than any light – turns directly and singularly toward him. The contemporary is the one whose eyes are struck by the beam of darkness that comes from his own time.
The ones who can call themselves contemporary are only those who do not allow themselves to be blinded by the lights of the century and so manage to get a glimpse of the shadows in those lights, of their intimate obscurity. Having said this much, we have nevertheless still not addressed our question. Why should we be at all interested in perceiving the obscurity that emanates from the epoch? Is darkness not precisely an anonymous experience that is by definition impenetrable, something that is not directed at us and thus cannot concern us? On the contrary, the contemporary is the person who perceives the darkness of his time as something that concerns him, as something that never ceases to engage him. Darkness is something that – more than any light – turns directly and singularly toward him. The contemporary is the one whose eyes are struck by the beam of darkness that comes from his own time.
More...