Reading around Frisch’s central question of how to stay alive “between the portrait of you that is made by the others and the one you make yourself”.
The ethical core of the marriage bond, Hegel is suggesting, lies in the ideal that marriage partners become so embedded in each other’s characters as agents, that neither is really in a position simply to renounce the other at will, for the constitutive “will to be married’ to the other comes to be part and parcel of each self’s own spontaneous affirmation of his or her own self-identity and of his or her own character as an agent—this will is not located merely in the particular exchange of vows (itself not dissimilar to a contract) that occurred on their wedding day.
From David Ciabatta’s investigation of the role of family in Hegel’s phenomenology.
An ideal perhaps, but one which I could, from my own vantage point, thoroughly deconstruct. Interesting.
Perhaps even an unattainable ideal but I’m only just beginning to dip into Hegel and it coincided with Frisch who makes selfhood in marriage a central theme of Stiller.
Interesting that you are dipping into Hegel. I have been going back to Hegel myself lately, 30 years after finishing my degree in Philosophy (and to this very day I can vividly remember being in the office of my German philosophy prof discussing Hegel – nothing of the discussion of course, but the experience is engraved in my mind in every other detail!)
As for poor Frisch, I am anxiously waiting for a copy of Homo Faber ordered at the beginning of the month before I was asked to write a small piece about it. I have since ordered a second copy for $1 (also from the UK) and put in an interlibrary loan request. It’s beginning to feel like a quest for the Holy Grail.
Homo Faber is worth the wait and doesn’t take long to read once or twice.
I don’t have the grounding to get enough from reading Hegel directly so tend to read through other writers.