Wittgenstein house

The interest in Ludwig Wittgenstein, disappeared in 1951, leaving in everything and for everything behind him a single book: the Logico-philosophicus tractatushas largely worn beyond his writings alone, as evidenced by several works, even certain films, inspired by the singularity of his person and the attraction he has exercised on a good part of those who have it known or encountered. The documents that bear witness to this, and thus contribute to nourishing a biographical or even hagiographical approach of his work, have multiplied over the years, of his correspondence to his notebooks or to the memories of conversations that were made public after his death.

This collection of correspondence that Wittgenstein had with the architect Paul Engelmann from 1916 to 1937 comes to take place among the documents and testimonies which are now part of literature on Wittgenstein. Published by Ilse Somavilla, he completes and enriches a more old work initially published by Brian McGuinness, adding several letters from Engelmann himself and his mother, as well as a set of texts, integrated into the Critical device, coming from the Engelmann Fund. A “ memory “, Written by Paul Engelmann, several years later, when he had left Austria for Palestine, completes all of these materials, from memories of conversations which essentially date from the period preceding the return of Wittgenstein in Cambridge in 1929.

The other side of the Tractatus ?

This period of Wittgenstein’s life corresponds to that of these letters, marked by the writing of the Tow And war, the return to Vienna, the years spent as a teacher in Lower Austria, the construction of a house for his sister Margarete (Gretl) and the meeting with Moritz Schlick, founder of the Vienna Circle in 1926. ‘It was, both in terms of everything that Wittgenstein then experienced that for the subsequent evolution of his philosophy. Of “ philosophy However, there is little question in these letters. Engelmann certainly devotes part of his “ memory ” At Towhe also reports on his discussions with Wittgenstein at the time of the development of the work, but the content of the letters is different. He most often relates to more personal questions where Wittgenstein’s tastes manifest, for example in poetry and literature, aversions and torments, moral or religious, or his difficulties with publishers when he aspires to have his Tow.

In all these reports, the friendship that had formed between Engelmann and him, clearly played a role that will recall the propensity that Wittgenstein had to prefer the company and the intimacy of people outside of philosophy. Engelmann tells in the book how he met Wittgenstein to Olmütz, his hometown, where Wittgenstein, then soldier, was looking for a room. He brought him the greetings of Adolf Loos, which Wittgenstein had met in Vienna, and of which Engelmann had been the pupil. It was not until several years later, in 1925, that Engelmann received a first proposal from Maragarethe Stonborough for the construction of a house, and it was only after some time that Wittgenstein himself launched himself with Engelmann In this project, after his sister had persuaded him.

The Viennese context

The construction of this house occupied Wittgenstein from 1927 at the end of 1928, which was that of his return to philosophy. During these two years, Wittgenstein and Engelmann picked up closely and they had the opportunity to exchange ideas on subjects that exceed both the problems of the construction of the house and those who started to interest Wittgenstein when he Contact with Moritz Schlick and the brand new Vienna circle. Paul Engelmann was a curious and attentive spirit whose tastes and interests-beyond his profession as an architect-communicated with those of Wittgenstein, precisely on subjects that the Tow held out. This is all the interest of these letters, and testimonies or documents that accompany them in this edition, to see them express themselves freely. In a way, they offer as an overview of the hidden side of the Tow And they reveal a dimension on which Wittgenstein himself insisted a lot when, for example, he tried to convince Ludwig von Ficker, then director of the Brenyto publish it. If one thing is certain, all speculation on this subject aside, it is because the questions relating to religion, art and poetry occupy a place which gives Wittgenstein a completely different image than that of A man exclusively concerned about “ The problem »Logic. Like some passages from his Notebooks or his Conversations with Maurice Drurythe materials gathered by Ilse Somavilla clearly make it possible to take the measure.

The correspondence between the two men extends slightly beyond the Viennese period, although for the most part it stops at the threshold of years which will prove to be crucial for the development of the “ second philosophy From Wittgenstein. But their background is fundamentally Viennese, so that everything that anchors the spirit and the thought of it is expressed in a context that has no equal. It is not until the language in which he is sometimes expressed which testifies, as the translator observes: François Latraverse, in a nore devoted to the use of the word “ Schmock », In various forms and typically Viennese inherited from the name of a character in a play by Gustav Freytag and his use by Karl Kraus. This aspect of the gathered texts gives the rest of the difficulties which await the translator of Wittgenstein, and this is one more reason to rent its quality and precision.

Vienna was then the scene of many intellectual and artistic episodes which earned him the image of a capital of modernity, fractured by all kinds of divisions. Wittgenstein has integrated more than one aspect by making Karl Kraus against the verbiage which invaded almost everything. The hostility which animates him on this subject, and which even leads him to depreciate poets who are very honorable like Ehrenstein, naturally leads him to turn to characters who, like Loos or Von Ficker, or Engelmann himself, seem to him to marry the same causes as him. His relations with them were not always easy, as some of the letters of this collection reveal. They nevertheless have the background Wittgenstein’s Vienna that described Alan Kanik and Stephen Toulmin in their 1978 book. The Wittgenstein who is expressed there is not yet-will it ever be really ? – Professor of Cambridge, the colleague of Russell and Moore, one of the major inspirers of a mainstream philosophical largely assimilated to the Anglo-Saxon world. All this makes it more understandable on the other hand ? We are entitled to think so, although we can also think of what Elizabeth Anscombe, consulted by Engelmann before the publication of this correspondence, replied: “ If I had been able to make sure by pressing a button that people would not have been interested in his personal life, I would have done it (…) I always have great suspicions when someone claims to have understood Wittgenstein. She herself not said that she never understood her ? The guardians of the temple are however easily brought to suspicion, and if Wittgenstein was so singular that this feeling may seem very legitimate, it is nonetheless to the reader, as they say, to judge, without giving up more than Of reason to the aura of mystery surrounding one of the authors who are the least brought to encourage us.