Glosses: Gómez Dávila, Cioran, Emo
Pier Alberto Porceddu Cilione
One of the forms of liberation, in the practice of philosophy, in which Nietzsche’s action has been effective is that of style. After Nietzsche, philosophical writing seems to have freed itself from the need for essayistic articulation, for the demonstration of unhurried arguments, moving towards short, aphoristic, fragmentary forms. During the Twentieth century, three authors seem to have taken this new articulation of thought and writing form literally: Nicolás Gómez Dávila, Emil Cioran, and Andrea Emo. These different authors, coming from very distant linguistic and cultural contexts, are united by two fundamental aspects. The first: a way of undertaking philosophical writing as a solitary thought investigation, secluded from the great currents of public and academic debates, recalling the private, existential, solitary dimension of philosophical reflection. The second: the need to employ the only form of writing suitable for this private and solitary dimension, i.e., a “short” writing form. This category is to be rethought, to the extent that the “brevity” of these authors’ writing is not based on an editorial contingency (the fragment), nor on a gender choice (the aphorism). It is a form of writing that exhibits its resistance to demonstrative development, which fixes the discontinuities of thought, and which claims broad areas of silence. It is by preserving these traits that authentic thinking is possible.
Keywords: Short Form, Aphorism, Existential Attitude, Philosophy, Solitude