/lit/ - Literature

>>18277825
>Nietzsche later wrote that his book and Wagner’s Parsifal libretto crossed in the mail “as if two swords had crossed”
But who was right in the end?

>>18278354
both of them in their own way / for their own audiences

>>18278444
But Nietzsche complained about Wagner stealing his audience.

>I have heard, once again for the fast time ‑ Richard Wagner's overture to the Meistersinger: it is a magnificent, overladen, heavy and late art which has the pride to presuppose for its understanding that two centuries of music are still living ‑ it is to the credit of the Germans that such a pride was not misplaced! What forces and juices, what seasons and zones are not mixed together here! Now it seems archaic, now strange, acid and too young, it is as arbitrary as it is pompous‑traditional, it is not infrequently puckish, still more often rough and uncouth ‑ it has fire and spirit and at the same time the loose yellow skin of fruits which ripen too late. It flows broad and full: and suddenly a moment of inexplicable hesitation, as it were a gap between cause and effect, an oppression producing dreams, almost a nightmare ‑ but already the old stream of wellbeing broadens and widens again, the stream of the most manifold wellbeing, of happiness old and new, very much including the happiness of the artist in himself, which he has no desire to conceal, his happy, astonished knowledge of the masterliness of the means he is here employing, new, newly acquired, untried artistic means, as his art seems to betray to us. All in all, no beauty, nothing of the south or of subtle southerly brightness of sky, nothing of gracefulness, no dance, hardly any will to logic; a certain clumsiness, even, which is actually emphasized, as if the artist wanted to say: `it is intentional'; a cumbersome drapery, something capriciously barbarous and solemn, a fluttering of venerable learned lace and conceits; something German in the best and worst sense of the word, something manifold, formless and inexhaustible in the German fashion; a certain German powerfulness and overfullness of soul which is not afraid to hide itself among the refinements of decay ‑ which perhaps feels itself most at ease there; a true, genuine token of the German soul, which is at once young and aged, over‑mellow and still too rich in future. This kind of music best expresses what I consider true of the Germans: they are of the day before yesterday and the day after tomorrow ‑ thy have as yet no today.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q6sgh3a5hbg

>>18279590
Nietzche wrote about music like a pseud. Sounds more like a musically illiterate journalist who wants to become a writer than a connoisseur.

>>18277825
>>18279590

>>18277825

One though as badly as the other composed. Sad.

>>18279366
git gud

>>18280352
You, apparently.

>>18281255
Both were thinkers and composers.

>>18279590
He's not saying anything.

>>18277825
It's from Ecce Homo.

>Human, all-too-Human, this monument of a course of vigorous self-discipline, by means of which I put an abrupt end to all the "Superior Bunkum," "Idealism," "Beautiful Feelings," and other effeminacies that had percolated into my being, was written principally in Sorrento; it was finished and given definite shape during a winter at Bâle, under conditions far less favourable than those in Sorrento. Truth to tell, it was Peter Gast, at that time a student at the University of Bâle, and a devoted friend of mine, who was responsible for the book. With my head wrapped in bandages, and extremely painful, I dictated while he wrote and corrected as he went along—to be accurate, he was the real composer, whereas I was only the author. When the completed book ultimately reached me,—to the great surprise of the serious invalid I then was,—I sent, among others, two copies to Bayreuth. Thanks to a miraculous flash of intelligence on the part of chance, there reached me precisely at the same time a splendid copy of the Parsifal text, with the following inscription from Wagner's pen: "To his dear friend Friedrich Nietzsche, from Richard Wagner, Ecclesiastical Councillor." At this crossing of the two books I seemed to hear an ominous note. Did it not sound as if two swords had crossed? At all events we both felt this was so, for each of us remained silent. At about this time the first Bayreuth Pamphlets appeared: and I then understood the move on my part for which[Pg 90] it was high time. Incredible! Wagner had become pious.

>>18279590
neetcha is such a wagnerling. this passage describes his own prose

>>18286259
Nietzsche talks about his own prose style being influenced by Wagner's, and his friends would criticise him for it.

Ok, but why was Wagner's beard growing like that? He isn't an ugly guy, but I thought the neckbeard thing is just for fat people. How do you grow a literal neckbeard as someone with normal weight?

>>18286477
Fashions change.

Question about Nietzsche: is the Overman born or made? In this day and age, can someone really become an Overman, or are we all last men?

>>18286545

Nietzsche mostly speaks about becoming an ubermensch and he states that it's the next stage in human "evolution".

Since this evolution is an ontological one, I'd say that no one can be "born" an ubermensch. The concept is mostly an evolution in thinking, not a physical one, thus every "ubermensch" has to be trained I think. But if a society already adopted the ubermensch world view, any subsequent humans that are going to be born would probably adopt this view as well, or at least be way more prone to accept it.

>>18279590
What a babbling pseud

>>18284115
Yes, Nietzsche composed as bad as Wagner thought, too!

Nietzsche's philosophy will foreverafter only be read by 14 year old edgelords.

Wagner's music is beloved by chads the world over.

>>18279590
>Nietzsche was gay
Lol. Nietzsche is an atheist, so he has no fixed ''believes''. Nietzsche hates christian because christian think about the long term. Nietzsche wants to live in the present moment.

Do you know who else live in the present moment? Women.
Yeah that's right, atheism is feminism.

I will tell you everything there is to know about women, and then you can replace ''women'' with ''atheist'' in general and ''Nietzsche'' in particular.

one of the biggest red pills is the first time you realize that women experience literally no disconnect between saying X when it feels good to say X, and completely betraying and contradicting X five seconds later when it feels good to do that. women like to "try on" male-centric morals and virtues like children playing dress-up, but they don't actually know what it means to set up a virtue as an objective principle for oneself and then resist the temptation to break it in future moments when it stops being convenient and pleasant.

so if you ask a woman what kind of guy she values, she will blab on and on for hours about how noble she is and how she sees through superficiality and only wants sweet genuine men and etc., etc., etc. then five seconds later she'll completely contradict everything she said. the key thing to understand about women is that they don't perceive any difference here. from a man's perspective, you are thinking "but she said 'i only do X' and two seconds later she did 'non-X'?" this is because the fundamental modality of male consciousness is erecting principles and trying to follow them - even if you're a shitty man, it just means you're shitty and weak at erecting principles, not that the FUNDAMENTAL modality of principle-erection is absent. a woman's fundamental modality is "doing what i feel like." to a woman, that behavior is completely consistent: in the first instance, she did what she felt like. then she did what she felt like again. only a man perceives that the CONTENT of the actions was contradictory, i.e., would be contradictory if performed by a man. but for a woman whose primary stream of consciousness is "what do i want to do right now? :) perhaps i'll wear a ribbon in my hair tomorrow, tra lala!," no such contradiction occurred, or indeed is even possible.

>>18289590

The Gesamtkunstwerk is a Hegelian idea.

>Drama, for Hegel, is the “highest” and most concrete art (PKÄ, 205)—the art in which human beings themselves are the medium of aesthetic expression. (Seeing a play performed by actors, as opposed to hearing it read aloud or reading it for oneself, is thus central, in Hegel’s view, to the experience of drama [Aesthetics, 2: 1182–5; PKÄ, 223–4].) Drama, indeed, is the art in which all the other arts are contained (virtually or actually): “the human being is the living statue, architecture is represented by painting or there is real architecture,” and—in particular in Greek drama—there is “music, dance and pantomime” (PKÄ, 223). At this point, it is tempting to say that, for Hegel, drama—to use Richard Wagner’s expression—is the “total work of art” (Gesamtkunstwerk). It is doubtful, however, whether Hegel would have been sympathetic to Wagner’s project. Hegel remarks that drama takes the explicit form of a “totality” in opera, which belongs more to the sphere of music than to drama proper (PKÄ, 223). (He has in mind in particular the operas of Gluck and Mozart.) In drama as such, by contrast, language is what predominates and music plays a subordinate role and may even be present only in the virtual form of versification. The Wagnerian idea of a “music drama” that is neither a straightforward opera nor a simple drama would thus appear, from Hegel’s point of view, to confuse two distinct arts.