%0 Journal Article %T Miroslav Krle£¿a¡¯s Comments on Albert Haler %A Bali£¿ %A Davor %J - %D 2018 %X Sa£¿etak Miroslav Krle£¿a (1893¨C1981) made frequent remarks on the views propounded by Croatian philosophers, as in the case of his contemporary Albert Haler (1883¨C1945?). Krle£¿a¡¯s first mention of Haler, a philosopher who later distinguished himself as an aesthetician of Crocean views, literary theoretician and historian, dates from 1923, when in a letter to his wife Bela Krle£¿a remarked on Haler as being a good and elegant writer from Dubrovnik. Later, Krle£¿a criticised Haler¡¯s worldview and his approach to aesthetic topics in three of his articles published in 1939 and 1940 in the journal Pe£¿at, as well as in his diary entries from 1942. The same topics underlie Haler¡¯s criticism of Krle£¿a towards the end of 1938 and during 1939. Krle£¿a thought that Haler criticised him as well as other authors of the social or ¡®Left¡¯ literature so as to draw attention to the detrimental influence of the ¡°so-called Left book,¡± claiming that Haler intentionally ignored ¡°whole piles of ideological logs in his views¡± (in ¡°The Purpose of Pe£¿at and Discussion about It¡±). Krle£¿a also remarked that Haler was a ¡°God-pleasing literary idealist¡± who had written a ¡°study on the depoetisation of art,¡± and that the mentioned depoetisation, according to Krle£¿a¡¯s interpretation of Haler, ¡°we systematically execute, as genuine incarnations of Satan in human shape¡± (in ¡°Dialectical Antibarbarus¡±). Haler¡¯s essay ¡°Depoetisation of Con temporary Life¡± or, as Krle£¿a put it, a ¡°pamphlet on the depoetisation of art,¡± Krle£¿a singled out as an example of continuous attacks during which ¡°all those Halers¡± fired their ¡°heaviest cannons¡± at him (in ¡°The Ruin of Reason¡±). He considered Haler as one of the leaders of the ¡°pamphleteering action¡± against him (diary entry from 1942). His final observations on Haler Krle£¿a expressed around 1960 within his marginalia concerning Frange£¿¡¯s encyclopaedic entry on Croatian literary criticism. On that occasion, he informed Ivo Frange£¿ that ¡°Haler¡¯s Crocean views on our literature¡± had not been properly examined in his entry, adding that Haler used a ¡°one-sided criterion¡± while assessing ¡°our literature.¡± Therefore, the antagonism that surrounded the relationship between Krle£¿a and Haler from 1938 was largely rooted in their different ideological orientation, which eventually spilt over into the field of aesthetics. Excluding the letter from 1923, Krle£¿a exposed his disagreement with Haler¡¯s views in at least three articles, in his diary entries and in his lexicographic marginalia. Consequently, at least six of Krle£¿a¡¯s bibliographical units from 1939 to 1963 %K Miroslav Krle£¿a %K Albert Haler %K philosophy %K aesthetics %K literary criticism %K conflict on the literary Left %K conflict between the literary Left and Right in Croatia %U https://hrcak.srce.hr/index.php?show=clanak&id_clanak_jezik=318048