Uhland’s poem has found fame as a litmus test in philosophical debates about Wittgenstein’s Tractatus. Like many works of art, the poem is dynamically produced in its effort to resolve a fundamental conflict. The poem’s conflict arises from the difficulty to connect the count’s life and his daydream. In the end, the poem as a whole serves to embody a critique of the capacity of a daydream to recover memories faithfully. Wittgenstein makes two remarks in a 1917 letter to Paul Engelmann that pertain to the poem. They are to be read in keeping with a resolute reading (James Conant, Cora Diamond) of the Tractatus; Wittgenstein’s first remark imitates the very movement of thought we find in the poem – and in doing so Wittgenstein makes good on his claim to talk about the poem: “the unutterable is, – unutterably – contained in what is uttered.” His second remark has, thus far, played no role in literature – Wittgenstein speaks of Engelmann’s dreams, yet he does not explicitly formulate the poem’s bearing on them. Here, too, he reenacts, in the formulation of his remark, the core conflict of the poem. My interpretation of the poem, finally, distinguishes three interpretive approaches (symbolistic, realistic, critical) in order to capture the understanding of the poem embodied in Wittgenstein's remarks.
Translated from German by Daniel Smyth.
Adorno, Theodor W.: Valérys Abweichungen, in: Noten zur Literatur II, Frankfurt/Main 1961; and more recently in: Gesammelte Schriften vol. 11, Frankfurt/Main 1997.Search in Google Scholar
Cavell, Stanley: The Investigations’ Everyday Aesthetics of Itself, in: Timothy McCarthy & Sean Stidd (eds.): Wittgenstein in America, Oxford 2001.Search in Google Scholar
Conant, James: The Method of the Tractatus, in: Erich H. Reck (ed.): From Frege to Wittgenstein: Perspectives on Early Analytic Philosophy, New York 2002, 374 – 462.10.1093/0195133269.003.0015Search in Google Scholar
Conant, James & Diamond, Cora: On Reading the Tractatus Resolutely: Reply to Merdith Williams and Peter Sullivan, in: M. Kölbel & B. Weiß (eds.): Wittgenstein’s Lasting Significance, London 2004, 42 – 97.Search in Google Scholar
Diamond, Cora: Having a Rough Story About What Moral Philosophy Is, in: John Gibson & Wolfgang Huemer (eds.): The Literary Wittgenstein, New York 2004, 133 – 145.Search in Google Scholar
Fröschle, Hartmut: Ludwig Uhland und die Romantik, Köln 1973.Search in Google Scholar
Grimm, Jacob and Wilhelm, Deutsches Wörterbuch. Vol. 3 (E – Forsche), Leipzig 1862.Search in Google Scholar
König, Christoph: Zu produktiven Konflikten im Roman ‚Abendland‘ von Michael Köhlmeier, in: Ulrike Längle & Jürgen Thaler (eds.): Michael Köhlmeiers ‚Abendland‘. Fünf Studien, Wien et al. 2010, 9 – 26.Search in Google Scholar
Kremer, Michael: The Purpose of Tractarian Nonsense, in: Noûs, 35 (2001), No. 1, 39 – 73.Search in Google Scholar
Uhland, Ludwig: Uhlands Briefwechsel, hrsg. von Julius Hartmann, 4 vols., Stuttgart/Berlin 1911 – 1916.Search in Google Scholar
Uhland, Ludwig: Werke, hrsg. von Hartmut Fröschle & Walter Scheffler, Vol. 1, Munich 1991.Search in Google Scholar
Zimmer, Ilonka: Uhland im Kanon. Studien zur Praxis literarischer Kanonisierung im 19. und 20. Jahrhundert, Frankfurt/Main 2009.Search in Google Scholar
© 2021 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston