Project:Why are some of Wittgenstein’s texts missing from this website?: Difference between revisions

Project:Why are some of Wittgenstein’s texts missing from this website? (view source)

Revision as of 19:13, 27 December 2021

No change in size , 2 years ago

no edit summary

MLavazza

Bureaucrats, Editors, Interface administrators, Administrators

5,960

edits

@@ Line 31: / Line 31: @@
 As we mentioned above, in some cases the publishing history of a book is very clear, and Wittgenstein is indeed the sole author of the ''Philosophical Investigations''.
-In other cases, books published under Wittgenstein’s name contain nothing that was in fact written by Wittgenstein: this is the case, for example, with the ''Lectures on the Freedom of Will'' and the ''Lectures and Conversations on Aesthetics, Psychology and Religious Belief'',<ref>“The first thing to be said about this book is that nothing contained herein was written by Wittgenstein himself. The notes published here are not Wittgenstein's own lecture notes but notes taken down by students, which he neither saw nor checked.” Barrett, C. (1976). Preface. Lectures and Conversations on Aesthetics, Psychology and Religious Belief. By Wittgenstein, L. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press. p. vii.</ref> that are collections of notes taken by his students. Here the situation is also clear: these will not be out of copyright until the term expires for those who took the notes. Even if the purpose of these scribes was probably to be as faithful as possible to Wittgenstein’s speech, that is to say they were actively trying to avoid being original, any rendering of a text that is not word-by-word does indeed generate a new layer of copyright.
+In other cases, books published under Wittgenstein’s name contain nothing that was in fact written by Wittgenstein: this is the case, for example, with the ''Lectures on the Freedom of Will'' and the ''Lectures and Conversations on Aesthetics, Psychology and Religious Belief'',<ref>“The first thing to be said about this book is that nothing contained herein was written by Wittgenstein himself. The notes published here are not Wittgenstein's own lecture notes but notes taken down by students, which he neither saw nor checked.” Barrett, C. (1976). Preface. Lectures and Conversations on Aesthetics, Psychology and Religious Belief. By Wittgenstein, L. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, p. vii.</ref> that are collections of notes taken by his students. Here the situation is also clear: these will not be out of copyright until the term expires for those who took the notes. Even if the purpose of these scribes was probably to be as faithful as possible to Wittgenstein’s speech, that is to say they were actively trying to avoid being original, any rendering of a text that is not word-by-word does indeed generate a new layer of copyright.
 Then there are midway cases, and it is with them, of course, that problems arise.
@@ Line 47: / Line 47: @@
 What Wittgenstein’s literary executors—or, more broadly, his editors—did in order to prepare the publication of such texts as ''On Certainty'', the ''Remarks on Colour'', ''Zettel'', ''Philosophical Grammar'', ''Culture and Value'', and others, was a combination of selecting, grouping, and sorting. The rendering of individual sentences has always been word-by-word, except for trivial corrections of spelling and punctuation. Lacking an objective criterion, it is very difficult to determine the extent to which this kind of activity can be considered creative.
-Based on our expertise in the field of copyright, we at the Ludwig Wittgenstein Project decided to only publish those texts for which we had strong reasons to determine that the editor’s work can ''not'' be considered creative. A case-by-case analysis is beyond the scope of this short essay, but it can be useful to provide an example. In their introduction to the original bilingual edition of ''On Certainty'', G.E.M. Anscombe and G.H. von Wright write: “What we publish here belongs to the last year and a half of Wittgenstein's life. […] It seemed appropriate to publish this work by itself. It is not a selection; Wittgenstein marked it off in his notebooks as a separate topic, which he apparently took up at four separate periods during this eighteen months. It constitutes a single sustained treatment of the topic.”<ref>Anscombe, G.E.M. and von Wright, G.H. (1972). Preface. ''On Certainty''. By Wittgenstein, L. New York: Harper & Row. p. vie.</ref> We consider this more than sufficient for determining the non-creative nature of Anscombe and von Wright’s work of collating the notes that make up the book.
+Based on our expertise in the field of copyright, we at the Ludwig Wittgenstein Project decided to only publish those texts for which we had strong reasons to determine that the editor’s work can ''not'' be considered creative. A case-by-case analysis is beyond the scope of this short essay, but it can be useful to provide an example. In their introduction to the original bilingual edition of ''On Certainty'', G.E.M. Anscombe and G.H. von Wright write: “What we publish here belongs to the last year and a half of Wittgenstein's life. […] It seemed appropriate to publish this work by itself. It is not a selection; Wittgenstein marked it off in his notebooks as a separate topic, which he apparently took up at four separate periods during this eighteen months. It constitutes a single sustained treatment of the topic.”<ref>Anscombe, G.E.M. and von Wright, G.H. (1972). Preface. ''On Certainty''. By Wittgenstein, L. New York: Harper & Row, p. vie.</ref> We consider this more than sufficient for determining the non-creative nature of Anscombe and von Wright’s work of collating the notes that make up the book.
 In other cases, the editors’ work of selecting and organising Wittgenstein’s remarks was not aided by any suggestion of Wittgenstein’s own. For as difficult as it may be to draw any conclusions, we think that this might be enough for someone to make claims similar to the one the Anne Frank Fonds made in 2015. In such cases, we decided not to publish the texts until we achieve a greater degree of certainty on the matter.