When he writes a text on the so-called “event,” reference to the Überlegungen is meant to keep the reader from feeling that he or she has already understood it all. Thus, in explaining the “event,” he writes: “The highest thing that must be possible to say must become an extreme silencing. Silencing [or reticence] authentically as silence bearing. But is the logic of silencing not the betrayal of all and nothingness? Certainly if, like logic, it were hitherto ‘read’ and obeyed.” According to his precisely calculated system of references, in a simultaneous up and downward movement, the Überlegungen are to make possible the abandonment of old rails to ride new ones.
That is not merely incomprehensible at first glance; it is the way it is supposed to be.
Meyer certainly looks certain about understanding it all. I left a comment at the translated article. The prospect of a new circus of self-certainty is tiring. But hey! A Indiana UP translation of Heidegger's 1934-34 lectures on Hölderlin is due in August! I'm looking forward to that.
At long last a broader discussion of the Notebooks in reference to Heidegger's overall project, thanks! A welcome respite from the conspiracy theorists who propose that Heidegger was the mastermind of a Nazi jihad, sending out coded messages to his suicide bombers to blow up western metaphysics and all those infected with it.
(No need to publish this,) i assume you can read German (i can't) and it would appear (from the little i can glean from a google autotranslation) that this two part review of the Notebooks might be one of the better ones. (the second part is found here) if you do read it, it would be interesting to know your thoughts on it. cheers!
