Heidegger's "Memorial Address" ¶1–6
Opening Remarks (¶1–5), the True Nature of Commemoration (¶6)
This post is part of a series. See previous post: Introduction.
For a full list of posts in this series, see Series Guide and Index.
For a summary of each post in the series, see Series Summaries.
Reminder on the Availability of the Text
Quick reminder before we begin: a free electronic version of this translation is available at beyng.com. You can also likely find PDF versions of the “Memorial Address” with a simple Google search.
Instructions for Reading these Posts
Scope of this post:
This post covers the first 6 paragraphs of “Memorial Address:” beginning with the opening line (itself a full paragraph):
Let my first public word in my home town be a word of thanks.
and ending with the final sentence of paragraph 6,
Thus even a memorial address gives no assurance that we will think at a memorial celebration.
In the PDF version of this text, this corresponds to pages 43–44.
(For brevity, I will be using the symbol (¶) to indicate paragraphs. So ¶1–6 refers to paragraphs 1–6.)
Our walkthrough format:
We’ll be using a commentary format.
Block quotes will appear throughout to indicate which part of the text I’m discussing at any given point. For example, in the case of ¶1–6, it will look like this:
Let my first public word in my home town be a word of thanks.
…
Thus even a memorial address gives no assurance that we will think at a memorial celebration.
Due to copyright restrictions, I can’t include the full text in these posts. That’s why you’ll see an ellipsis (…) in the block quotes—it indicates that the text has been abridged.
Each new topical section will begin with a block quote to show the passage we’ll be focusing on. After that, I’ll quote specific sentences for more focused commentary, like this:
I thank my homeland for all that it has given me along the path of my life.
My commentary, etc.
This way, you can keep the text open in another window or on your desk and easily follow along with where my commentary fits in the original.
I’m sure the format will make sense once you get started!
Post Summary
The original German title of the speech is Gelassenheit, often translated as “releasement” or “letting-be”—a key concept in Heidegger’s later philosophy.
The English title, Memorial Address, highlights the context: a 1955 speech in Messkirch, Germany, honoring composer Conradin Kreutzer.
Heidegger’s opening remarks (¶1–5) focus on formalities and the local setting; they’re not central to the philosophical argument but reflect on homeland and shared history.
In ¶6, Heidegger begins to question what it truly means to commemorate someone.
He uses a classic philosophical move: asking what something really is, in this case, remembrance.
Heidegger challenges the idea that playing music or giving a speech is enough for genuine commemoration.
True remembrance requires thoughtfulness—a kind of engaged, reflective thinking that reshapes how we relate to what is remembered.
He warns that memorials often invite passive listening rather than genuine engagement.
Heidegger’s goal is to unsettle his audience and awaken them to their own tendency toward thoughtlessness.
The address is meant to provoke a deeper form of attentiveness, both to Kreutzer’s legacy and to our own habits of mind.
On the Title of this Speech
A quick note on the title. In Heidegger’s collected works in German (the Gesamtausgabe), this text is titled Gelassenheit, a term that can be translated as “releasement” or “letting-be.” It’s an important concept in Heidegger’s later philosophy and this text, and we’ll return to explore it in more depth later on.
For now, it’s helpful to know that the English title, “Memorial Address,” makes the occasion of the text clearer. This is a speech Heidegger gave in 1955 at a memorial in Messkirch, Germany, in honor of a local composer, Conradin Kreutzer. That’s why the text begins with opening formalities and remarks on the service.
1. Introduction to ¶1–6
After some opening remarks (¶1–5) that we will not dwell on, Heidegger begins to develop his central concern by calling into question what commemoration really means (¶6).
One important feature of Heidegger’s style is how he frames philosophical problems. He does not treat them as abstract or academic. Instead, he aims to involve his audience directly. His goal is to unsettle them—not just intellectually, but at the level of who they are in the depths of their being. We will see him take this approach with his listeners at the memorial service as well.
In this section, he invites them to ask whether they are truly there to commemorate or merely to sit back and be entertained.
As readers, we should remember that we are also part of his audience, though in a less immediate way. This text is meant to be a provocation. We should read it as if Heidegger is speaking directly to us, naming our tendency to be thoughtless more often than not, and challenging us to become more thoughtful.
Key Points
This is the text of a speech Heidegger gave at the 175th memorial celebration for the German composer and conductor Conradin Kreutzer.
Heidegger delivered it in the fall of 1955 to a general audience in Messkirch, Germany.
In its opening paragraphs, he begins to develop the problem of thoughtlessness by raising questions about the true nature of commemoration.
We should read this as if Heidegger is challenging us directly to learn to think in a new way.
2. Opening Formalities (¶1–5)
Let my first public word in my home town be a word of thanks.
…
The musicians and singers who take part in today’s celebration are a warrant that Conradin Kreutzer’s work will come to be heard on this occasion.
Heidegger’s opening remarks are not important for our purposes. So there is no need to dig into the formalities of the occasion. But there are a few things worth noting:
Messkirch was the hometown of both Heidegger and Kreutzer. When Heidegger speaks of “homeland” (Heimat), he is referring in part to his literal birthplace and early home. Homeland will become an important theme later on in the text.
Kreutzer’s music was performed at the event in his honor. Heidegger says little about Kreutzer or his music in the speech, so we won’t focus on them either.
Der Feldweg (“The Pathway”) is a short reflective piece Heidegger wrote about a path near Messkirch. It explores the role that walking this path played in shaping his thinking over the years. It is translated into English in Sheehan’s Heidegger: The Man and the Thinker.
3. The True Nature of Commemoration (¶6)
But does this alone constitute a memorial celebration?
…
Thus even a memorial address gives no assurance that we will think at a memorial celebration.
After his opening remarks, Heidegger begins to frame the central problem he wants to address: the predominance of thoughtlessness in our lives.
He starts by creating distance between his audience and the topic at hand: the true nature of commemoration and remembering.
This is Heidegger’s version of a classic philosophical move going back to Socrates: asking what something is—in this case, remembering someone—and revealing that we don’t understand it as well as we assume.
But does this alone constitute a memorial celebration?
Heidegger begins by asking what a true memorial really is. In this case, is it simply a matter of playing Kreutzer’s music? The implied answer is no. A genuine memorial, he suggests, requires something more.
A memorial celebration means that we think back, that we think.
A true memorial, Heidegger says, requires that we think back—or more simply, that we think. Or, we might say, we remember. But just remembering is not enough. It needs to be a thoughtful remembering. In English today, we might capture Heidegger’s meaning by saying that to truly participate in a memorial, we must be thoughtfully engaged.
To be thoughtful is to think in a way that lifts us out of our habitual mindset and narrow focus on ourselves, and reshapes how we respond to things. A thoughtful gift, for example, means that our attention to someone’s unique personality or circumstances shaped our choice. In the same way, a memorial calls for a kind of thoughtfulness that goes beyond simply remembering or retelling stories.
For Heidegger, true remembrance involves more than just recalling the past—it asks something deeper of us.
Yet what are we to think and to say at a memorial which is devoted to a composer?
…
It is to help us to think back both to the composer we honor and to his work.
Heidegger is not dismissing music, but he insists that music alone cannot make us truly thoughtful. Music can awaken thoughtfulness, but to think in a fuller sense, we also need “the language of words.”
Even Kreutzer’s music, which includes sung words, doesn’t guarantee thoughtfulness. Singing alone isn’t enough.
This is why Heidegger’s speech was included in the memorial program: to help guide the audience into a more reflective, thoughtful state.
Yet as we’ll see, Heidegger believes that even a memorial address isn’t always enough to provoke genuine thoughtfulness in its listeners.
These memories come alive as soon as we relate the story of Conradin Kreutzer's life, and recount and describe his works.
…
Thus even a memorial address gives no assurance that we will think at a memorial celebration.
Just because someone gives a memorial address doesn’t mean we will be thoughtful.
Picture yourself at a funeral service of an acquaintance, someone you barely knew. You’re sitting in a pew or on a folding chair. Someone steps up to speak about the person everyone has gathered to remember. They share stories—some make you smile, others bring a sense of loss. Maybe you zone out for parts of it. Maybe you even find yourself tempted to pull out your phone. Soon, the speech is over. You rise with everyone else and head to the reception, where food, drink, and conversation quickly might make you forget everything that was just said. And perhaps your tone or behavior shows that the service didn’t properly attune you.
This is the attitude Heidegger is critiquing. He warns that during a memorial speech, it’s easy to become passive. We let the speaker do the work while we simply sit back and listen. The stories may entertain us, but they also allow us to remain spectators rather than participants in genuine thoughtfulness.
To truly commemorate, we need to be thoughtful. This means allowing what or who we are remembering to pull us out of our routine mindset so that it can reshape and re-attune us to the situation before us.
Key Points
True commemoration or remembrance requires thoughtfulness.
Thoughtfulness allows something—such as the remembrance of a person—to reshape and re-attune us.
We cannot be passively thoughtful; we must be actively engaged, allowing the experience to involve and expose our whole being to being transformed from the outside-in.
Key Terms to Remember
remembrance
thoughtlessness
thoughtfulness
4. Takeaway Summary
In ¶6, Heidegger is preparing his audience—both those in front of him and us as readers—for the philosophical problem he is about to develop. As we will see in the next paragraph, that problem is the widespread presence of thoughtlessness in our lives and in the culture more broadly. But here, he begins to set the stage by suggesting that his audience may not know as much about commemoration, remembrance, or even how to be present at a memorial service as they assume they do.
He observes that the common tendency is to go through the motions, to passively listen to stories, and to avoid engaging the whole self in a form of remembering that might reshape and re-attune them to the moment.
He wants his audience to become aware that it takes effort to truly be in a memorial service. And as we will see this effort will amount to becoming more thoughtful.
Thank you for starting this endeavor. I have no academic background in philosophy and need the sort of hand-holding that you say you want to provide. My first real contact with philosophy was when my son introduced me to Michael Segrue's Teaching Company lectures on casette tape.
I read Zohar Atkin's An Ethical and Theological An Appropriation of Heidegger's Critique of Modernity after reading Zohar's Substack and Eilenberger's Time of the Magicians. I managed to slog through The Question Concerning Technology but that was beyond my reach.
I am 85 now and have lived through the transition to the Age of Humans-as-Resources. I'm on the side of John Gray, Matthew Crawford, Mary Harrington: et al. I suppose that is small way I helped make that happened. My profession was first writing operating system software for early mainframe computers and later software supporting the engineers designing computers.
I wish you success in this Substack and, again, thank you.