Cyfrowa Etnografia

http://zbiory.cyfrowaetnografia.pl/public/6094.pdf

Media

Part of The Shadows of Europe / Polska Sztuka Ludowa - Konteksty 2014 Special Issue

extracted text

1.
The initiation story says: On a beach in Sidon a bull
was aping a lover’s coo. It was Zeus. He shuddered, the
way he did when a gadfly got him. But this time it was a
sweet shuddering. Eros was lifting a girl onto his back: Europa. Then the white beast dived into the sea, his majestic
body rising just far enough above the water to keep the girl
from getting wet. There were plenty of witnesses. 1 Just
as every mythical tale so this one too has a number of
variants; this is the reason why Roberto Callasso tells
it in several ways, but the most essential appears in the
above-cited fragment. This expressive image leaves an
imprint upon memory.
From the catalogue of symbolic figures comprising
a graphic abbreviation of Europe, the greatest career,
as is known, was made in Western imagination by the
vision of a comely girl seduced and raped by a virile
bull. The narrative base for this image was provided by
Greek mythology. Western iconography is full of as­
sorted versions of the “rape of Europe” and likenesses
of a young woman forcefully abducted by a zoomorphic deity. True, this image is revived in contemporary
fine arts or political publicistics, but its power seems
to have deteriorated somewhat. Texts relating to Eu­
ropean identity, its boundaries and inner divisions
sometimes mention: “raped Europe”, but this figure
is clearly treated metaphorically, a discernible signal
of mental distance towards a once living image. 2 In
turn, in the visual arts the topic of raped Europe ap­
pears relatively more often, albeit one may readily no­
tice that in this particular case we are dealing with
individual statements, many of which are proposed in
ironic travesties that disclose a certain distance, while
the range of their impact is narrow. Apparently, in col­
lective imagination this symbolic image “giving food
for thought” has lost the ability to describe and ex­
press contents that involve us.
Nature, as is widely known, does not tolerate a
vacuum. The same holds true for culture. If the like­
ness of Europe as an alluring woman and a victim
of perfidious rape is slowly fading and receding into
an old curiosities shop, then in accordance with the
above-mentioned rule some other image should take
its place. Does there exist today a vital and impres­
sive symbolic likeness in which contemporary Euro­
pean sensitivity could recognise itself? Are we capable
of discovering a metaphorical expression that would
cumulate European experience in such an ingenious
way? Do such metaphors still appear in the contempo­
rary discourse? After carrying out a source survey (ad­
mittedly fragmentary) I would like to propose two can­
didates that in my opinion would have a great chance
to assume the position vacant for some time. They are
the words-images: “home” and “spirit”. Both possess
enormous cultural rank and a rich metaphorical-sym­
bolical potential. 3 It still has to be tested whether the
211

DARIUSZ CZAJA

The Shadows
of Europe.
History and Metaphor

slogans: “House of Europe home” and “Europe-soul”
are promising from the cognitive point of view.
Consequently, take a closer look how the mirrors
of those two capacious metaphors reflect a portrait
of contemporary Europe, and if so, then what sort of
knowledge about its inhabitants they disclose. Yes - I
use the word: knowledge. In the domain of science no
one any longer questions the cognitive value of the
metaphor. Actually, the metaphor is almost univer­
sally recognised as a useful albeit non-discursive in­
strument of cognition. 4 Ortega y Gasset, one of the
first spokesmen of the epistemological values of the
metaphor wrote that it simply serves the process of
bringing closer that, which shines mysteriously on the
horizon of our intellectual capacities. 5 This sugges­
tion was confirmed several decades later by Ricoeur:
A metaphor is not an ornament of discourse. It has more
than emotive value because it offers new information. A
metaphor, in short, tells us something new about reality. 6
In other words, it sometimes makes it possible to bet­
ter grasp that, which in the space of thought is barely
sensed or only assumed. It embraces as if in a single
flash that, which the conceptual discourse is not al­
ways capable of noticing, aptly naming, and describ­
ing.
If this is the case then it is worthwhile to immedi­
ately accentuate a fact of special importance for our
analysis. Examples cited further in the text, in which
the afore-mentioned metaphors fulfil a revealing func­
tion, are, apart from their serious intellectual contents,
fascinating also because they do not passively continue
existing semantics with which language associates by
force of habit, but achieve their creative and enhanc­
ing reinterpretation. It so happens that the metaphori­
cal mirror in which we would like to observe the es­
sential features of Europe possesses a special property,
namely, its registers chiefly dark colours, as we shall
soon see. It is worth keeping in mind that this cer­
tainly peculiar mirror (it has to be proved whether it is
actually “crooked” !) certainly does not lie and at most
shows with great intensity the most vivid elements of

D an u sz C zaja • THE SHADOWS OF EUROPE. HISTORY AND METAPHOR

the reflected image. In other words, it undoubtedly
refers to that, which r e a l l y exists and is the living
matter of actual history.

2.
It is probably not an overly innovative thesis to
maintain that in the political publicistics of recent
years or, more widely: in discursive space encompass­
ing texts referring in particular to the present-day
shape of Europe and its problems, the most frequent
has been the figure of the Home. In the wake of the
fall of the Berlin Wall, upon the tide of the unification
of Europe but also in the course of the still continuing
expansion of the European Union by including new
member states, political publicistics repeats ad nause­
am phrases about the “common house of Europe”, the
construction of a "new house of Europe”, a return to
the “house of Europe”, and so on, and so forth...
The metaphor of the European home is con­
spicuously present in the excellent book by Thérèse
Delpech: Savage Century: Back to Barbarism, which
should not come as a surprise but, and this is much
more symptomatic, it appears in invariably dark hues.
Delpech is a French politologist, director of strate­
gic problems at Commissariat à l’énergie atomique,
researcher at Centre d’études et de recherches inter­
nationales, and member of the Institute for Strategic
Studies and RA N D Europe Advisory Board. The list
of her posts indicates clearly that her analyses and
expert opinions are conspicuously pragmatic and di­
rectly connected with current political praxis. Even
more interesting within this context is the fact that
Delpech has also proved herself to be a sophisticated
scholar interested in culture and specially sensitive
to the value and power of the symbol. I accentuate
those two sides of the rhetorical strategy applied by
Delpech because her book is a rare and actually bril­
liant example of the productive unity of contradic­
tions. Excellent familiarity with facts from the realm
of political history is supplemented time and again
by symbolic tropes. The author readily resorted to
them, and this sort of hermeneutic praxis is always
justified cognitively: Delpech is concerned with a
reconstruction of the anatomy of European identity,
with particular apprehension for the catastrophes
suffered by the twentieth century. On the one hand,
there are perceptive political realism, historical eru­
dition, and harsh facts, and on the other hand - a
sphere of the imagination and literary fiction. Here
politics and art overlap, creating a curious mixture
of events from most recent European history. The
“real” is viewed from the perspective of the “unreal”
and the two cast a light on each other. This blend of
two orders produces the outlines of a convincing in­
tellectual construction. The outstanding study also
credibly connects two qualities rarely encountered
212

under a single book cover: analytical aloofness and
emotional rage.
Another feature worthy of accentuation is the
cognitive attitude demonstrated by Delpech, free of
facile simplifications and ideological superstitions.
Sober perception, so strong in this case, is not tanta­
mount to a catastrophic vision of history. The French
author did not for a single moment assume the pose
of a demented contemporary Cassandra. She merely
attempted - and did so with rare honesty - to take an­
other look at the European Continent and its blood­
stained twentieth-century plight. More, she did so not
only due to historical motives, but chiefly in order to
carefully follow the symptoms of impending future. In
other words, we are not dealing with fortune-telling
but with a thorough and careful analysis of the symp­
toms of that, which c o u l d take place in the future
and more or less lucidly emerges on the horizon of the
contemporary historical moment. Her comments are
supposed to incline the readers to once again embark
upon a thorough reflection about twentieth-century
history, with particular concern for signs delineating
the outlines of the possible future.
The metaphor of the Home appears in the reflec­
tions pursued by Delpech already in one of the initial
chapters. We immediately become cast into a discourse
that is far from emotionally lukewarm. It has to be said
distinctly - the expression: “the house of Europe” does
not resound with pride or excessive warmth:
The history of the last century showed the ease with
which historical transformations of unprecedented violence
could follow without warning on the heels of the best of
times. As in Greek tragedy, crime engendered crime in
the house of Europe, which twice set the rest of the world
ablaze. From the experience, lessons were drawn for the
reconciliation of the European nations. But what is now
at stake is Europe’s capacity to assume international re­
sponsibilities in a deeply troubled word. And from that
point of view, the i n t e r n a l lessons just mentioned are
insufficient. The unprecedented historical eruption from
which the entire twentieth century arose does not speak
only of the madness of Europe and of national passions. It
is evidence of a wider adventure concerning humanity as
a whole: the sudden appearance of storms whose warning
signs on the horizon we Europeans have too long pretended
to ignore, storms no one can control once they have been
unleashed. When such sudden acceleration of history oc­
curs, it signals the defeat of political action, which can do
nothing but run after political events until it is swallowed
up by them. If Europe has any message to transmit to the
word, it is truly this one. 7
In other words, together with Delpech’s politological reflection we rapidly depart from positive conno­
tations usually associated with the metaphor of the
home. 8 The “House of Europe” described by the au­
thor is certainly not a safe space. It is neither haven

D an u sz C zaja • THE SHADOWS OF EUROPE. HISTORY AND METAPHOR

nor a refuge or asylum for its residents. True, it is still
a family home, but its foundations rest on unexpired
crime. It is, first and foremost, a space full of risk, un­
certainty, fear, and anxiety. This is a home encum­
bered with its dirty family history, which it is incapa­
ble of getting rid of and with which, in the opinion
of some, it is impossible to battle. Finally, it is a place
in which phantoms appear and which brings to mind
the image of the haunted house with its exemplary reali­
sations by Walpole (The Castle of Otranto), Poe (The
Fall of the House of Usher), or Dickens (The Haunted
House), so frequent in the English Gothic novel. This
is a house full of the ghosts of the past returning at
night. A house, which on the outside is imposing and
noble but actually is in a state of advanced ruin. A
house that conceals unresolved dark secrets.
In one of the subsequent paragraphs Delpech
went on to expand this image of the European home.
Once again she was assisted by literature, whose fic­
tional products sometimes possess the amazing power
of condensing historical experiences into a symbolic
abbreviation. Together with successive close-ups the
image of the “house of Europe” assumes a concrete
form. Now, it becomes the familiar, gloomy castle
from Shakespeare’s Hamlet, the Danish Elsinore, the
castle haunted by the Ghost of Ham let’s Father. R e­
call, however, that this is also space that turns into
the scene of consecutive tragedies, set into motion as
if by accident. More: the titular character becomes
an extremely credible porte parole of the European
spirit: apathetic, listless, and immersed in acedia.
European mentality seeks its reflection in the soul
of Hamlet: capacious, ambiguous, and a puzzle even
for him:
If one has to define the twentieth century with a single
word, Herzelend, the German for 'sick at heart", would
be the most accurate. It designates a form of melancholy
and a debilitation of the emotional side of human nature.
Twentieth-century man finds a natural companion in the
most universal of tragic heroes, Prince Hamlet, whose pa­
ralysis of will he shares. The century’s tragedies all arrived
without having been willed just as Hamlet never willed the
death of anyone, except for Claudius. The detour down
which the human species began to travel early in the last
century resembles a storm, whose causes and ultimate con­
sequences it remains ignorant of. Those consequences are
still washing upon our shores, like the belated waves of
a great catastrophe of which we have not heard the last.
Elsinore thus possesses exceptional symbolical power
for the Europe of the twentieth century.
By chance, the two world wars were the occasion for
many studies of Shakespeare’s play: like the Elizabethan
hero, cultivated Europeans found themselves engulfed in
barbarism with no time to understand what was happening
to them. In a sense the mystery of Hamlet’s character held
up a mirror to them: the more he was examined the more

there was to elucidate. Death was the theme of the play, as
it was of the century. 9
Delpech regarded this inability to conduct (the
admittedly) difficult self-reflection to be the mortal
sin of the European spirit. The titular l’ensauvagement,
barbarity or, more literally, savagery of twentiethcentury history is only rarely the object of thorough
reflections. After all, the heart of the matter does not
involve a simple registration of the phenomenon (this
has been already performed by school textbooks!),
but a meticulous and multi-strata analysis of the po­
litical, mental and, possibly above all, spiritual condi­
tions that turned the “house of Europe” into a space of
ghouls, death, and cruelty. The crux of the matter is a
lively, emotional response but also a wise examination
of the historical trauma on an individual and group
scale. Apparently, the absence of such reflection is the
reason why bloody history keeps on repeating itself.
Add some sort of an organic (Hamletic?) unwilling­
ness on the part of Europe towards embarking upon
deeds, a clear-cut opposition towards barbarity. Exam­
ples from our recent past only confirm the aptness of
this finding:
While Europeans sleep, others become aware of the
power of ideas. But the ideas that are spreading most wide­
ly are very much contrary to European values. Contempt
for human life, the refusal to distinguish civilians from
combatants, assassination presented as a duty - these are
direct challenges to the values that our societies are sup­
posed to defend. What price are we ready to pay to do that?
Considering the E U ’s reaction to the appalling massacre
in Beslan, South Ossetia, in September 2004, we may
conclude that the price must not be very high. Apart from
The Netherlands, not a single Western government dared
question Putin about his incompetent and ambiguous han­
dling of the tragedy. It seems, however, that more than one
question would be relevant, since information about the
attack was available beforehand and not provided to South
Ossetia, since the explosives and the weapons came from
the Russian Interior Ministry, and since at least one of the
hostage takers belonged to the Moscow police internal af­
fairs service. 10.
The “House of Europe” in the descriptions formu­
lated by Delpech is also a museum full of junk from the
past, of little value and submerged in the stultifying
smell of mothballs. This is the source of the helpless­
ness of its residents and their frequent conviction evidently, quite correct - about the relegation of the
“old Continent”, which not so long ago ruled over the
whole world, to the margin of history. The “House of
Europe” is not only haunted - it is simply lifeless, a
space of vanishing vitality, and it seems that its inhab­
itants manage to move only thanks to the force of in­
ertia and are devoid of a firm substrate. They resemble
bloodless shadows from the Elysian Fields, wandering
listlessly and without a purpose:

213

D an u sz C zaja • THE SHADOWS OF EUROPE. HISTORY AND METAPHOR

Europe is at once turned too much toward the past
(...). Like other Western societies, it lives in the moment
and prevents it from adapting its present to its past and
from imagining a future for itself. The reason it does it
have a politics based on its thought is because that thought
has ceased living. European democracy has become ab­
stract like its values, unable to exercise the kind of influ­
ence in the world that the world needs. In a period of great
international stability, this might have no consequences.
In an era of profound transformations and exasperated
passions this exhaustion is charged with danger. It is time
for Europeans to interrupt the subterranean ruminations
about history and start thinking about the future. Other­
wise, others will do it for us. 11
The paradox formulated at the beginning of this
statement must be understood correctly. W hat does it
mean that Europe looks towards the past and, at the
same time, is cut off from it? This turn towards the
past, a source of negative consequences for European
awareness, should be understood as a ritual celebra­
tion by Europe of its former glory. The process of being
cut off from the past is a traumatic burden, the result
of the absence of reflections on the more profound in other words, not only, and not predominantly po­
litical - reasons for its historical decline. Both gestures
are the cause, increasingly often stressed by analysts,
of the weakness of Europe as a space of ideas, the fra­
gility and meagreness of the civilisation project called
“Europe”, which, one has the impression, has exhaust­
ed its creative power and can be interred. European
ideas no longer constitute a model for the rest of the
world or even a source of inspiration. The most strik­
ing consequence of this state of things is the absence
of a clearly outlined vision of the future. Europe is a
home drifting helplessly on the sea of history, a leaking
raft full of castaways with an obscure identity.
What sort of a future awaits this “house of Eu­
rope”, haunted and with quaking foundations? In the
epilogue of her book, nota bene titled: The Human Soul
Torn to Pieces (naturally, from our point of view it is
impossible to ignore the fact that in the heart of this
gloomy “home” metaphoric there appears and is ex­
cellently exploited its “ghostly” supplementation!) 12
Delpech stressed that our present-day situation resem­
bles the one in 1905. The whole second part of the
publication (whose protagonists include, i.a. Nicholas
II and Wilhelm II, but also Blok, Bely, Einstein, D e­
rain, Freud, et al.) is a brilliant analysis of forecasts
of future misfortune, whose symbolic onset was the
year 1905. The French original version of Savage Cen­
tury... appeared precisely a hundred years later, as if
to strongly accentuate spiritual affiliation with that
period. We know that history never repeats itself ex­
actly, but it is possible to capture analogies between
distant moments. The author insists that an earnest
identification of certain signs of time is not only an

essential cognitive task but can protect us from the
realisation - quite feasible - of a black scenario, from
historical recidivism. What is it that we are concealing
in the basement of our European home that we do not
want to - or do not know how to - adapt?
What is most peculiar about our age is the conviction
that evil is installed at the core of history and our frenetic
rejection of that conviction. Twenty-first-century man
bears a strange resemblance to primitive man seeking to
drive evil outside the known world and transform it into
a taboo. For us as for him, evil brings misfortune, and we
want it out of our sight. But the world no longer has any
borders beyond which we might cast it. The experience of
evil has such force in contemporary consciousness, and the
disorder of minds and things is so evident, that what seems
most pressing is restoring vigor to whatever might allay the
ubiquitous anxiety. 13
Our situation resembles the mood prevalent in
1905 - similar to the inhabitants of that world we have
eyes full of fear and anxiously await something that we
foresee with a sixth sense but which we are incapable
of defining and describing. This anticipation is con­
nected in a mysterious way with traumatic memory
relegated to the unconscious (the basement) regions
of the European soul: The history of the last century, that
hortus inclusus, of which we remain unconscious prison­
ers, is so full of misfortunes on which to meditate that we
sometimes feel the weight of the dead mowed down by wars
and revolutions, wandering like ghosts through our cities
demanding justice. 14 As long as we do not adopt that
ominous heritage (at this point, I supplement the au­
thor’s reflection) the European home will be haunted
by phantoms of the past. There is no doubt that we
have to start thinking by considering that dark back­
drop still present in the cellars of our European sub­
conscious, because only such a strategy will enable us
to discover once again the promise of the future, dim
on the distant horizon. Crimes of the twentieth cen­
tury are to a great measure committed by the subcon­
scious, and this is why they remain so mysterious and
menacing. Delpech cited with unconcealed emotion
the words of François de Menthon, the French chief
prosecutor at Nuremberg, who was certain that he
was adjudicating “a crime against the spirit”, i.e. un­
dermining the foundations of every civilisation. This
is the sort of crime that leads towards a decline of the
human race into barbarity: More than fifty years later,
those remarks are moving not only because they evoke
the atrocities committed but because of the strangeness of
the words used by the French prosecutor, particularly the
deeply unfashionable expression "crime against the spirit”.
We no longer understand what it designates: the loss of
that which constitutes humanity itself. 15
The characteristic of the European home deline­
ated in the discussed book certainly does not emanate
excessive optimism. The “house of Europe”, it turns

214

D an u sz C zaja • THE SHADOWS OF EUROPE. HISTORY AND METAPHOR

out, is not merely a pleasant and friendly place, and
its residents do not feel comfortable in it. Its twenti­
eth-century portrayal brings to mind a collapsing ruin
with a dirty past leaning time and again out of its base­
ments. Apparently, Delpech toppled thoroughly our
naive optimism born on the tide of a Union-oriented
and very much ad hoc Euro-enthusiasm. She does not
startle us but merely warns. By placing an analytical
probe into the not so distant past of the Continent she
pointed out the hidden sources of a possible repetition
of the past.
I looked upon the scene before me - upon the mere
house, and the simple landscape features of the domain upon the bleak walls - upon the vacant eye-like windows
- upon a few rank sedges - and upon a few white trunks
of decayed trees - with an utter depression of soul which I
can compare to no earthly sensation more properly than to
the after-dream of the reveler upon opium - the bitter lapse
into everyday life - the hideous dropping off of the veil.
There was an iciness, a sinking, a sickening of the heart an unredeemed dreariness of thought which no goading of
the imagination could torture into aught of the sublime. 16
Is it so difficult to recognise in this great evocative
fragment of The Fall of the House of Usher a repulsive
(but credible) portrait of our “house of Europe”? Are
we to such a degree under the spell of the unification
project that we are incapable of feeling any sort of af­
filiation with it? Remember upon this occasion that a
metaphor sometimes assumes a concrete form and does
so with brutal literalness. Is the recently announced
and widely commented case of the Austrian Josef
Fritzl, who in the very centre of merry Europe (Aus­
tria felix!) for years imprisoned and raped his daugh­
ter in the basement of her family home, not - apart
from moral revulsion accompanying this discovery - a
painful confirmation of the aptness of remarks about
a European home with an underpinning of horror? A
house that is haunted, continuously and always 17.

3.
It was probably Edmund Husserl who was the first
twentieth-century philosopher - and certainly the first
to propose such a strong formulation - to conceive Eu­
rope not as a geographical, national or political space
but as a spiritual being. In his Viennese lecture titled
evocatively: The Crisis of European Sciences and Tran­
scendental Phenomenology Husserl proposed to compre­
hend Europe not in topographic categories but men­
tal ones or, in more risky albeit exact terms, spiritual
ones: Clearly the title Europe designates the unity of a
spiritual life and a creative activity - with all its aims, inter­
ests, cares and troubles, with its plans, its establishments,
its institutions. Therein individual human beings work in
a variety of societies, on different levels, in families, races,
nations, all intimately joined together in spirit and, as I
215

said, in the unity of one spiritual image. This should stamp
on persons, groups, and all their cultural accomplishments
an all-unifying character. 18
Husserl wrote outright about the “spirit of Europe”
and its serious crisis, which in his opinion was closely
connected with a re-orientation of Western thought
into a naturalistic and objectivising current. I refer
to the example of Husserl not for analytical purposes
since tracing the “theology of the history of the W est”,
outlined so acutely therein, and “shaping the idea of
European humanity” are not our supreme objective.
I recall Husserl’s observations, which, on the margin,
resound with the rhetoric of yore (“spirit”, “soul”,
“spiritual Europe”) for two fundamental reasons. First:
his comments comprise a solid intellectual base for
all those thinkers who will perceive the canvas of Eu­
rope in “spiritual” categories and are sufficiently bold
to write about the “European spirit”. Secondly: curi­
ously, the reflections of two Czech authors - philoso­
pher and theologian - about the “spirit of Europe”, at
which I would like to take a closer look, owe much to
the reconnaissance performed by the author of Logical
Investigations. The first, the outstanding Czech thinker
Jan Patocka - a student and to a certain extent an
heir of Husserlian phenomenology - deliberating on
the condition of Europe embarked upon certain mo­
tifs indicated by the master, although the course of
his thoughts runs in a slightly different direction. The
second, the Czech theologian Tomás Halik - in turn,
a student and to a certain degree an heir of patocka
- already considered directly the phenomenon of the
“spirit of Europe”, checked by Husserl. In this intel­
lectual rally race it was necessary to determine the
point of departure for historiosophic thought. In our
case, therefore, such a point of departure is Husserl
and his musings, and the goal - those of Halik. Here,
contemplations by patocka play the role of a keystone
between the two, and thus we shall start with them.
Just like Husserl, the philosopher from prague
strongly accentuated the metaphor of the soul as a
useful tool for understanding the essence of European
culture. In order to describe the basic core of Europe­
anness the Czech philosopher evoked the Greek idea
of “concern for the soul” (epimeleia tes psyches), per­
ceiving it as a foundation of the European existential,
cultural, and political idiom.
Man is just and righteous owing to concern for the
soul, which is the legacy of classical Greek philosophy.
This means that truth is not given once and for all, nor
due to its comprehension and acceptance, but that it
is a lifelong self-controlling and self-unifying intellec­
tual-life praxis. In Greek philosophy concern for the
soul assumes two extreme forms: we care for the soul
so that it could transverse the world via the eternity
of the universe and in this fashion attain at least for a
short time a form of existence fitting for the gods (De­

D an u sz C zaja • THE SHADOWS OF EUROPE. HISTORY AND METAPHOR

mocritus, then Aristotle); or, on the contrary, we think
and learn to render our soul a hard crystal of being, a
steel crystal tempered in the perspective of eternity.
It is one of the possibilities of being which contains
the source of motion, decisions about its existence and
non-existence, i.e. dissolution in the indefiniteness of
the instinct and unenlightened tradition (Plato). 19
This conceit of the spirit as the foundation of Eu­
rope possessed for Patocka foremost importance, and
he returned to it upon multiple occasions, both when
he stressed the breakthrough nature of the introduc­
tion of this category (psyche) into the philosophical dic­
tionary of the ancient Greeks, and when he emphasized
the existential and cultural relevance of the conceit of
"concern for the soul”, 20 or when he distinctly marked
a demarcation line between "spiritual man” and “the
intellectual”. 21 Jacques Derrida, in a penetrating com­
mentary on Plato, this time assuming the role of an
analyst of famous fragments of Plato’s Phaedo - nota
bene, in the French philosopher’s text a prominent role
was performed by the entries: “spirit” and “Europe” accentuated predominantly the mysterious and evasive
nature of psyche, features so strongly indicated by the
Czech philosopher. 22 The inclusion by Patocka of the
“spirit” into the European genotype was certainly not
accidental, but a well conceived gesture.
In his theological and philosophical reflections H a­
lik often referred to comments made by Patocka, but
in this context something else is relevant: one could
have the irresistible impression that the whole time
his thoughts contain the philosophical legacy of the
Prague phenomenologist. The constant point of refer­
ence, which for Halik is Patocka’s oeuvre, is disclosed
in a lecture given in Berlin in May 2003. Its modest
title: What Binds Europe? seems to announce a rather
routine set of banalities about “European values”, but
the Czech theologian turned out to be the winner of
this intellectual confrontation. As is almost always the
case he tried unconventional solutions, and his lan­
guage is free of theological-catechetic newspeak. It is
noteworthy that both in the study by Delpech and in
her writings political reality enters into close relations
with the rebirth of art. In his, let us recall, nominally
theological deductions Halik referred to real facts of
twentieth-century history but often, in order to render
them more expressive, he cited aptly chosen literary
examples that are always more than mere rhetorical
ornaments. Halik started his reflections by question­
ing a certain disseminated and obvious view:
In connection with the progressing integration of
Europe we frequently hear Christians demand: “give
Europe its soul”. I cannot help myself, but the longer
I listen to this initially justified slogan that more it ap­
pears to be a superficial and outright arrogant cliché.
Is Europe really soulless? And if this were the case,
does anyone have at his disposal such power as to be
216

capable of proposing and offering a soul for Europe? Is
the person offering a soul not actually proposing ex­
clusively ideology? No man and no institution - even
the Church - is able to give a soul: we know from
Goethe’s Faust that it is even quite difficult to take a
soul, since at the very last moment such an endeavour
can be crushed by the One who is the only capable of
granting and redeeming a soul. 23
One way or another, there are no doubts that
the concept and metaphor of the spirit comprise the
point of departure of Halik’s considerations about the
phenomenon of Europe. In doing so, he creatively ap­
proached the concept of dualistic anthropology, well
embedded in European thought. If, according to it,
man is composed of “soul” and “body” then such in­
gredients will be easily found in European identity: In
the process of the transformation and expansion of the
European Union prime interest is focused certainly on
the “body of Europe” - its political, economic and ad­
ministrative structures; it could appear, therefore, that
the spirit of Europe has remained slightly in the shade.
Is, however, the courage that leads towards presentday radical operations and changes affecting the body
of Europe not based on some sort of non-verbalised
conviction about the existence of a unifying princi­
pium, which lends “Europe” its meaning, that some
sort of a force of inner attraction is at work here and
merges Europe at the time of all those changes? Per­
haps this is why we could use the “spirit of Europe”
metaphor for describing this force? 24
The point is not, therefore, to once again whine
about the soullessness of Europe or produce yet an­
other publicistic pamphlet maintained in rather wellworn elegiac poetics. By following the example of
Patocka cited verbatim in the successive paragraph
Halik wished consider the rich contents of ”the spirit
of Europe” metaphor. In doing so, he drew attention
to the need for a constant awareness of the fact that
we are dealing with a metaphorical expression, i.e. a
multi-motif product with extensive meaning. He was
particularly concerned with avoiding an overly rapid
identification of metaphorical contents and replacing
“the spirit of Europe” metaphor with concepts most
frequently evoked within this context: culture, reli­
gion, spirituality, and philosophy. Let us first allow the
whole diverse scale of associations produced by this
image be heard. 25
By emulating classical differentiations of meta­
physical anthropology Halik mentioned three ’’powers
of the spirit”: memory, intellect, and will. In turn, by
referring them to European history he showed in detail
what each of those components means in reference to
the collective organism, whose cryptonym was created
by the metaphor in question.
Analysing the phenomenon of memory, Halik and this is significant - was more willing to write about

D an u sz C zaja • THE SHADOWS OF EUROPE. HISTORY AND METAPHOR

forgetting. He showed that thanks to the eschatologi­
cal heritage still alive in Christian science Europe fre­
quently turned towards the future, a dimly outlined
perspective of salvation. The revolutionary and uto­
pian spirit intensively permeating European thought
denoted a sometimes violent turn towards the future
and contributed to rewarding the process of forgetting
about one’s past. To put it in stronger terms: towards
sacrificing the past for the sake of the future. Seculari­
sation and nationalisation only assisted this attitude.
Halik proposed an interesting combination of the con­
ceit of memory with that of the conscience. He argued
that not only did they refer to identical domains but,
on the contrary, they belong to each other inseparably
and enter into the reaction of a hermeneutic circle. To
possess knowledge about oneself, to possess one’s iden­
tity is tantamount to knowing one’s history and being
able to tell it to others, both on a personal level and a
group one. Nonetheless, memory without conscience
is mute. Only the light of the conscience is capable of
penetrating the nooks and crannies of our memory.
In turn, to prevent conscience from being susceptible
to ideological poisons it must graduate from an exact­
ing school of historical memory. Seduced by promising
visions of European integration we cannot forget the
past of Europe and in particular its dark sides. This
means a readiness to show compassion and “solidarity
with the victims”, as was put so poignantly by the Ger­
man theologian Johann Baptist Metz. 26
The slogan that Europe places most often on its
coat of arms is the intellect. In a brief recapitulation
of the adventures of the intellect in European history
Halik stressed the diversity of its comprehension. Nous
and logos, intellectus and ratio, Vernunft and Verstand
are not necessarily semantically equivalent concepts.
Events with greatest effects in the history of the Eu­
ropean intellect include an alliance of Greek intellect
and Christian faith. One of the consequences, with
a negative impact upon European thought, was the
application of the Greek instrumentarium for the pur­
pose of describing divine reality. Due to a thoughtless
error the living God of the Old Testament became
identified with the Aristotelian supreme being, the
Unmoved Mover. This onto-theological hybrid was to
haunt for centuries to come. Modern emancipation of
the intellect and liberation from this theological su­
pervision had two consequences. On the one hand,
the intellect retrieved the rights due to it, and on the
other hand there took place its distinction, resulting
in the emergence of a current of dogmatic rationalism.
The intellect freed from religious concessions started
to brilliantly play the role of a harsh critic of assorted
religious and ideological delusions. A t the same time,
there appeared within European space a new protago­
nist: the intellect blind in one (metaphysical) eye.
This intellect does not understand itself and is incapa­
217

ble of excusing itself. Halik perceived one of the ways
of leaving this cul de sac in expanding the conception
of the rational, restricted to unambiguous Logos, and
in opening the intellect towards the mythical founda­
tions from which, after all, it originates.
Nothing probably characterises the European Con­
tinent and its spiritual identity as satisfactorily as the
concept of the will. In his long history the European
is constantly permeated by the will of power. “Euro­
pean will” time and again enters a state that Halik de­
scribed as “European messianism”: the truly essential
features of European history include the urgent wish
to convince the rest of the world, a tireless willing­
ness to offer (...) always that, which in a given period
Europe did not regard as its greatest gift, entrusted
for the sake of a universal dissemination of goodness:
Hellenic and Roman civilisation, Christianity, the
emancipation of women, human rights, the protec­
tion of the natural environment... .27 From time im­
memorial the European readily assumed the role of a
missionary converting others to his “infallible convic­
tions”, whose excess he always possessed, or the role
of a travelling salesman trading in ideas that were sup­
posed to be - and this is a premise with all the qualities
of an axiom - forever superior. Europe performed a
catechesis, imposed, urged, and handed out, perceiv­
ing in this process the fulfilment of its supposed spir­
itual mission. In front of our eyes the European will of
might (and will of power) fell apart, leaving behind a
shadow of its former splendour. Does Europe still have
something to offer? The last question, referring to the
“post-messianic” status of Europe, does not sound very
convincing when asked by Halik (assuming that I cap­
tured his tone correctly): Who shall present, and what
part of the European heritage to the new inhabitants
of our Continent today and tomorrow? 28 A t the same
time, there is clearly no mention of “aliens” but of “our
continent” ; thus Halik accentuated the thought about
the offer that Europeans can make. Old dreams about
European might seem to have vanished irretrievably.
Having followed the basically “positive” (although,
as we have seen, slightly contested) and culture-cre­
ating dimension of the European “spirit” Halik also
mentioned and underlined its “dark” foundation. As
an expert on psychoanalysis he was well aware of the
fact - which he particularly stressed - that the will is
always directed by motives. The latter could be situ­
ated on the surface, open and discernible, but they are
also just as often concealed and embedded in the sys­
tem of the unconscious. A t the same time, and this
is essential, hidden motives are beyond the range of
our reflections, although this is not to say that they
are absent. Halik thus postulated that while speak­
ing about ”the origin of Europe” one should speak not
only about open phenomena, Europe’s visible “bright
consciousness”, but also to fathom intensively and

D an u sz C zaja • THE SHADOWS OF EUROPE. HISTORY AND METAPHOR

earnestly the European “subconsciousness”. Since
much of that, which affects Europe is concealed be­
neath the stratum of consciousness should we not ex­
amine also the “dreams cherished by Europe” and its
“flawed undertakings”? Should we not study its myths
and "archetypes? 29. Halik suggested that gauging the
archaeology of mythical narrations about Oedipus,
Odysseus, Merlin, Ahasver, Faustus, Hamlet or Don
Quixote could fulfil a revealing role and disclose the
hidden - and not necessarily positively evaluated - as­
pects of impulses steering European projects, plans,
and dreams.
We recall that in the reflections pursued by Delpech
the metaphor of the “house of Europe” ultimately re­
sulted in that of the “fragmented spirit”. In the case
of Halik the opposite is true: the metaphor of the
“stratified soul” together with its dark, low, and drivefocused foundation overlaps in a very natural fashion
the familiar image of the “haunted house”: a house
whose subterranean parts conceal wicked secrets.
Apart from the notorious European longing for
“light” mention is also due to the poets, philosophers
and mystics of the night. Europe stores many most val­
uable treasures in its dungeons. Once we examine the
place held by European rationalism it seems appropri­
ate to descend to the cellars of mysticism, esotericism
and gnosis; since we tour the cathedral of faith we
should not overlook the crypts of heresy, superstition
and secret cults.
A fragment of the spirit of Europe consists of vi­
sions and fantasies concerning “the others”, who ini­
tiated their missionary, discovery-buccaneer or war
expeditions beyond the boundaries of our Continent.
To become acquainted with Europe means to see its
relation towards other cultures and civilisations since
it frequently transfers to them its hopes and fears as
well as its shadows.
A bold project for European unity and a joint Eu­
ropean home spanning from the Atlantic to the Ural
Mts. is not built on unknown and unploughed soil. It
is, however, erected on a foundation composed of a
multi-storeyed arrangement of forgotten treasures and
charred ruins, the burial ground of deities, heroes and
felons, rusty ideas and unexploded bombs. We do not
have to grant our Europe a spirit but from time to time
we have to follow it towards “the mothers”, the under­
ground, in the manner of Orpheus following Eurydice
or the slayed Christ following Adam and the Old Tes­
tament fathers, depicted on old icons. 30
Halik persistently reminded us, his contemporary
readers, of this simple truth, empirically tested by psy­
choanalysis: sometimes the repressed returns to the
surface and does so with even greater force. He tells
us about the traumatic lesson of twentieth-century to­
talitarianisms, a lesson, which we either did not com­
prehend or which we refused to deliberate on: The
218

conflagration of evil and violence, which swept across
Europe during two world wars and under the rule of
two inhuman “substitute religions”, i.e. Nazism and
communism, destroyed, in the opinion of many peo­
ple, both trust in the might of goodness as the foun­
dation of the world (the metaphysical conception of
God) and the Enlightenment-era trust in the intellect
and the goodness of human nature capable of creating
an ideal society with the assistance of the instruments
of its rationality - the power of science and technol­
ogy. A confrontation with the evil of two world wars,
the secular regimes of the twentieth century, and such
phenomena as Auschwitz and the Gulag demonstrat­
ed that an uncritical lay-humanistic belief in the om­
nipotence of human rationality was at the very least as
illusory as uncritical dependence on divine authority
from “the netherworld”. “The divinity of man” proved
to be incapable of occupying the throne emptied after
“the death of God”. 31
alik demonstrated that the spirit possesses a number
of bright powers, which play their games in the day.
A t the same time, he stressed the importance of the
exploration of the subconscious, the nocturnal and
dark sphere that conceals everything that for assorted
reasons we do not disclose or want to reveal to the
outside world. Here we store our feelings, desires, and
dreams that produce embarrassment and shame. It is
here that elements of psychic life described as repul­
sive, rejected, and unwanted are to be found. Finally, it
is here that contents repressed from the space of con­
scious life exist. Halik did not express this firmly, but I
believe that completing his thought will not constitute
abuse on my part. As was mentioned, it is in the na­
ture of the repressed that it likes to resurface. If this is
the case, then the analogy between the individual soul
and that of the group is basically apt, and reflection on
the “sprit of Europe” metaphor leads to a conclusion close to the diagnosis formulated by Delpech - that for
the sake of our spiritual wellbeing we should become
acquainted with the nature of this dark space. Europe
must descend to “the Mothers”, those enigmatic per­
sonae from the second part of Faust, and their dark
kingdom in order to establish direct contact with the
horror of this world of chaos. One has to pass through
such initiation, known in Jungian terminology as “the
integration of the shadow“. It is precisely the accept­
ance of the actual existence of the “’shadowy spheres”
and their subsequent inclusion into conscious life that
is (could be) a condition for spiritual rebirth. Any oth­
er path is at best the maintenance of illusion, and in
the worst case - of self-deceit.
Interestingly, those two distinctions, at first glance
radically different both as regards the profession of their
diagnosticians and the points of departure accepted
by them, share fundamental conclusions. Delpech ac­
centuated not the peace, warmth, and security of the

D an u sz C zaja • THE SHADOWS OF EUROPE. HISTORY AND METAPHOR

“house of Europe” but, on the contrary, its terrifying,
concealed spaces. She revealed the horror of dark cel­
lars haunted by phantoms of the past and brought to
the surface dangerous and spiritually toxic places. Just
as Edgar Allan Poe showed the symptoms of the disin­
tegration of the house of Usher so she traced cracks on
the walls of the once solid European construction. In
a similar vein, Halik first stressed the possibilities and
opening outlined in a ”positively” comprehended met­
aphor of the soul. Interestingly, he ultimately concen­
trated on its dark ”interior”. In doing so, Halik stressed
and brought forth elements of the dark subconscious
of the Europeans, the enormous and still pulsating re­
gions of horror and wilderness. These are the cursed
terrains, which we, as a rule, do not wish to know and
maintain a safe distance, because subconsciously we
experience their toxic power. Both texts, with their
careful forecasts and far from optimistic, leave us in
a state of uncertainty. There is, however, a single leg­
ible suggestion: reality will not change by itself, and,
as always, everything is up to us. A transformation of
the world has (must have!) a transformation of our
interior as its foundation and an inalienable condition
for potential. 32 A book must be an ice-axe to break the
seas frozen inside our soul. This motto taken from Kafka
and opening the book by Delpech could be engraved
on the façade of the renascent “house of Europe”.

4.
A t the end of his comments about the “European
spirit” Edmund Husserl, sharing his fears with the
readers, recalled yet another symbol from the dis­
tant mythological European past: the symbol of the
phoenix undergoing rebirth, a strong and spectacular
source of food for further thought. Described by the
great phenomenologist it becomes the figure of future
reborn Europe.
Europe’s greatest danger is weariness. If we struggle
against this greatest of all dangers as ‘good Europeans’
with the sort of courage that does not fear even an infinite
struggle, then out of the destructive blaze of lack of faith,
the smoldering fire of despair over the West’s mission for
humanity, the ashes of great weariness, will rise up the
phoenix of a new life-inwardness and spiritualization as
the pledge of a great and distant future for man: for the
spirit alone is immortal. 33
Husserl wrote those words in 1935. As we all know
too well, they were never heeded. Because they were
not loud enough? Because no one wanted to hear them?
Because they were said much too late? The catastrophe
came almost on the next day. The phoenix turned to
ashes in the death camps. It seems, however, that more
than seventy years from the time when they were writ­
ten the above remarks - with the possible exception of
their pathos and messianic hype - have not lost any of
their therapeutic force. One could add: unfortunately.
219

Today, we know for certain that the European Phoenix
is not strong enough to rise on its own. We have to as­
sist it. To put it differently: we must help ourselves and
extract ourselves from the quagmire around us. “His­
tory” is a hypostasis and no one will perform our task for
us. The problem lies in the fact that no one knows, or is
capable of knowing, whether matters have not gone too
far. The fact that the spirit is essentially immortal does
not necessarily comfort us in this situation.
The sober voices of the two cited intellectuals, de­
prived of illusions but also far from barren pessimism,
propose a difficult lesson, an ominous memento, and
cautious hope. Those two tones resound very clearly,
a circumstance that renders their identification ex­
tremely credible.
Endnotes
1 R. Calasso, Zaślubiny Kadmosa z Harmonią, transl.
S. Kasprzysiak, Kraków 1995, p. 14.
2 M. Kundera, Zachód porwany albo tragedia Europy
Środkowej, “Zeszyty Literackie” no. 5:1984. An acute
polemic with the theses proposed by Kundera was con­
ducted by Joseph Brodsky: Why Milan Kundera Is Wrong
About Dostoyevsky, in: idem, Pendulum’s Song, Paris
1989, pp. 99-106; an excellent reconstruction of the
ideological and mythological foundation of Kundera's
reflections combined with a critical analysis of the omis­
sion of the Balkans in his concept of Central Europe is
to be found in a chapter in the book by Maria Todorova:
Bałkany wyobrażone, transl. P Szymor, M. Budzińska,
Wołowiec 2008, pp. 301-344.
3 An extensive set of symbolic associations connected with
the “home” (a reconstruction based on Polish literary
and belief material) is contained in the publication by D.
and Benedyktowicz, Dom w tradycji ludowej, Wrocław
1992; on linguistic stereotypes and symbolic aura surro­
unding the “spirit” (an analysis based on the contempo­
rary vernacular) see more in: D. Czaja, Anatomia duszy.
Gry językowe i figury wyobraźni, Kraków 2006.
4 Texts about the cognitive role of the metaphor total
hundreds and reference to even the basic corps would
take up several pages. Metaphor and Thought, ed.
Andrew Ortony, Cambridge 1993, still remains an
instructive anthology of texts on this topic. Owing to
the holistic epistemological project directed against the
philosophy of concepts let us note by way of example the
study by Hans Blumenberg: Paradigmen zu einer
Metaphorologie, Bonn 1960.
5 J. Ortega y Gasset, Dwie wielkie metafory, in: idem,
Dehumanizacja sztuki i inne eseje, transl. P Niklewicz,
introduction S. Cichowicz, Warszawa 1980, p. 223.
6 P Ricoeur, Język, tekst, interpretacja. Wybór pism, transl. P
Graff, K. Rosner, Warszawa 1989, p. 133.
7 Th. Delpech, Powrót barbarzyństwa w XXI wieku, transl.
W. Dłuski, Warszawa 2008, p. 41; my emphasis - D. C.
Nb. The translation into the Polish is slightly more “nar­
rative-oriented”, while the original has the brief and
ambiguous: Uensauvagement.
8 J. Bartmiński, Dom i świat - opozycja i komplementarność,
in: idem, Językowe podstawy obrazu świata, Lublin 2006,
p. 168.
9 Delpech, op. cit., p.145.

D an u sz C zaja • THE SHADOWS OF EUROPE. HISTORY AND METAPHOR

10 Ibid., pp. 104-105.
11 Ibid., p. 105.
12 Analogisation between the image of the house and that
of man is a frequent motif in symbolic imagination. Cf.
Cirlot's remarks about symbolic oneirism: [...] in dreams
we employ the image of the house as a representation of the
different layers of the psyche. The outside of the house signi­
fies the outward appearance of Man; his personality or his
mask. The various floors are related to the vertical and spa­
tial symbols. The roof and upper floor correspond to the head
and the mind, as well as to the conscious exercise of self­
control. Similarly the basement corresponds to the uncon­
scious and the instincts (just as sewers do in symbols perta­
ining to the city), J. E. Cirlot, Słownik symboli, transl. I.
Kania, Kraków 2000, p .112, s. v. House.
13 Delpech, op. cit., p. 296.
14 Ibid., p. 297.
15 Ibid., p. 304.
16 E. A. Poe, Zagłada Domu Usherów, transl. B. Leśmian, in:
idem, Opowiadania niesamowite, transl. B. Leśmian, S.
Wyrzykowski, Warszawa 1976, pp. 319-320.
17 From this viewpoint it is worth reflecting on the state­
ment made by Elfriede Jelinek, who without any illu­
sions explained the origin of the history of the "monster
from Amstetten": The terrible crime committed against
Natascha Kampusch or the Fritzl family in Amstetten do not
surprise me (and I would no want to know how many similar
cases, about which no one will ever find out, still exist). (...)
History allowed Austria to feel like a victim without any
greater acts of penance, and to always hide behind a beauti­
ful façade its active participation (for instance, in Nazi
atrocities). Nonetheless, the repressed returns with doubled
force. In Austria, both in concealment (as in the basement in
Amstetten) and in public (the economic scandals of the
recent period) things take place that could not be imagined
elsewhere, at least in comparable countries. Perhaps the
reason lies in the fact that, e.g. in Germany the press is much
more varied and more critical. I am particularly interested in
the paradigmatic nature of such horrible stories as those from
Amstetten, and am not surprised by the crimes committed in
Austria, Elfriede Jelinek talks to Magdalena Miecznicka,
“Dziennik", 16 August 2008.
18 E. Husserl, Kryzys europejskiego człowieczeństwa a filozo­
fia, transl. and introd. J. Sidorek, Warszawa 1993, p. 16.
19 J.Patocka, Europa i dziedzictwo europejskie do końca XIX
wieku, transl. J. Zychowicz, in: idem, Eseje heretyckie z
filozofii dziejów, transl. A. Czcibor-Piotrowski, E.
Szczepańska, J. Zychowicz, Warszawa 1988, p. 111.
20 The question, which we shall pose, will be as follows: is
concern for the soul, located at the very source of
European legacy, capable of creatively attracting our
attention today, when amongst general weakness and
coming to terms with decline, we need support to such
a great extent, J. Patocka, Sytuacja człowieka - sytuacja
Europy, transl. J. Kłoczowski, p. 191.
21 J. Patocka, Człowiek duchowy a intelektualista, “Logos i
Ethos", no. 1:1993, pp. 125-134. I cite one of the closing
paragraphs from this excellent text whose topicality
appears to be constantly growing: spiritual man, capable
of sacrifice and seeing its sense and significance (...)
cannot be afraid. Naturally, spiritual man is not a politi­
cian in the commonplace comprehension of that term:
he is not a side in the dispute conducted by this world
but he is political in a different manner (...) because he
compels society and all those around him to face that
220

unobvious nature of reality, ibid., p. 134.
22 J. Derrida, Secrets of European Responsibility, in: idem,
The Gift of Death, Chicago-London 1995, p.15.
23 T Halik, Co zespala Europę? Wykład berliński, in: ide­
m, Wzywany czy niewzywany Bóg się tutaj zjawi. Europejskie
wykłady z filozofii i socjologii dziejów chrześcijaństwa,
transl. A. Babuchowski, Kraków 2006, pp. 129-130.
24 Ibid., p. 130, emphasis: D. C.
25 Ibid., p. 131.
26 J. B. Metz, Teologia wobec cierpienia, transl. J. Zychowicz,
Kraków 2008, cf. in particular reflections on “theology
after Auschwitz", pp. 31-59.
27 Halik, op. cit., pp. 140-141.
28 Ibid., p. 143.
29 Ibid., p. 144.
30 Ibid., p. 145, my emphasis - D. C.
31 Ibid., p. 237.
32 32. One more thing. Both analytical studies can be inc­
luded into the wide and truly “unclear" category of texts
from a domain of, so to speak, historical anthropology
(in the case of Delpech with an accent on the political
sphere, and in Halik's writings - on the cultural-religious
one). Apart from the contents they possess, in my opi­
nion, yet another methodological value: they demon­
strate how within the space of a single text it is possible
to readily encounter symbolic anthropology (examining
contents in abstracto) together with engagée anthropolo­
gy (stressing the necessity of referring research conclu­
sions to the real world). This benefits both approaches.
At any rate, studies by Delpech and Halik prove that
between these two attitudes towards research into cul­
tural reality there does not have to exist an insurmoun­
table obstacle.
33 Husserl, Kryzys...., p. 51.