PN Review Print and Online Poetry Magazine
News and Notes
Digital Access to PN Review
Access the latest issues, plus back issues of PN Review with Exact Editions For PN Review subscribers: access the PN Review digital archive via the Exact Editions app Exactly or the Exact Editions website, you will first need to know your PN Review ID number. read more
Most Read... Rebecca WattsThe Cult of the Noble Amateur
(PN Review 239)
Vahni CapildeoOn Judging Prizes, & Reading More than Six Really Good Books
(PN Review 237)
Eavan BolandA Lyric Voice at Bay
(PN Review 121)
Drew MilneTom Raworth’s Writing ‘present past improved’: Tom Raworth’s Writing
(PN Review 236)
Alejandro Fernandez-OsorioPomace (trans. James Womack)
(PN Review 236)
Jamie OsbornIn conversation with Sasha Dugdale
(PN Review 240)
Poems Articles Interviews Reports Reviews Contributors
Oxford University Press
Gratis Ad 1
Next Issue Kei Miller on poetry and volume control Parwana Fayyaz's Afghan poems Gabriel Josipovici bids farewell to Aharon Appelfeld Craig Raine plants a flag A.R. Ammons from two angles

This report is taken from PN Review 208, Volume 39 Number 2, November - December 2012.

A Stange Enthusiasm for Herr Her (1) Frank Kuppner
In which a celebrated philosopher emphasises what extremely special and utterly central people great philosophers and poets are - and, astonishingly enough, a celebrated poet then comes along and by and large agrees with him.

Perhaps what linked them, rather, was their common attempt to create a language that would fail to express the inexpressible at least in a somewhat more authentic manner? Yes. If one must express nothing - or, indeed, so much more ambitiously, Nothing - then let it at least be done in, shall we say, a bona fide way. Better than nothing, one can only assume. After all, one has the reputation of German philosophy to consider, does one not? Who knows? Perhaps it may even be a start?

I don't suppose 'inauthentic' could just be another word for 'intelligible'?)

A new language? Now, there's a thought, eh? With which, if successful, one would be able to combine sounds and make noises in (no doubt hugely significant) ways that hadn't been managed before. Right. So far, so (presumably) revelatory. And yet: how would anyone, as a matter of fact, be quite sure what these supposed great new thoughts, insights, intuitions, or whatever they might be (hitherto unexpressed, and indeed inexpressible, in more traditional, weary, old-hat, objective, scientific, middle-class, non-German etc. etc. language) - how would anyone be quite sure what these great new thoughts themselves actually amounted to? Eh? How, Mr Naive y ...

Searching, please wait... animated waiting image