Abstract

In the first part of the paper, the author tackles the question of troubadour subjectivity. The subject of the poem announces the losing of oneself, abandonment of the existing state of affairs and self-surrender, but sees no tragedy in it, for a source of genuine joy. Love deserves sacrifice, it is worthy of all human desire, but it is not a conventional love, neither marital nor family love, rather, it is an ethereal and poetic love for Our Lady. For everything that may be related to such love, we believe that a far more appropriate translation of gaya scienza is a joyful lesson, for it signifies far more to mark the troubadour point than the usual [Croatian/Serbian] translation cheerful doctrine. What is notably striking about the inherited solution is the complete misapprehension of the troubadour point, as the word science can only be associated with the troubadour wisdom if it is previously put in quotes. In short, the author concludes that a democratic scientist is happy and optimistic, while Nietzsche’s »joyful« scientist does not hesitate to show his anguished face publicly. The troubadour’s anguish for distant and unrealizable love is peculiarly close to Nietzsche’s suffering in a modern world that seems unable to live in a world of a distant and absent God.