Very brief notes on: Nietzsche, F (1989) Ecce
Homo. In Kaufmann, W. ( 1989) Ed and Trans
The Genealogy of Morals and Ecce Homo.
New York:Vintage.
Dave Harris
[These are brief notes because there's not much to
say by way of summary. At one level, it is
pleasantly easy to read, if occasionally manic and
zself-aggrandizing. Kaufmann's Introduction
spells out the main issues...]
Ecce Homo [EH] should be read as
literature, and it summarises the whole range of
work from Nietzsche's perspective. No doubt
the prose is beautiful. Nietzsche's life is
described briefly, terminating in his decade of
madness. The self portrait in EH has
been seen as largely insane, but it is really a
non naturalistic style that gives it its
character, or possibly with traces of madness
occasionally. 'Nietzsche should be compared
with Van Gogh' (202).
The argument is not at all professorial or
scholarly, and there are very few footnotes or
references to other work. It shows Nietzsche
as a Dionysian [the admiration for Dionysus runs
throughout - roughly, Dionysus was worshipped as
the god that valued life, pleasure, light
heartedness]. The themes that develop are
first of all critical passion, 'the revolt against
hallowed pieties' (203), a new vision of the world
that valued clarity and spirit. 'Ecce Homo',
the words spoken by Pilate presenting Jesus, is
designed to suggest that a realistic conception of
man is required, waerts and all, petty sins and
mistakes included, modern man, not a saint or
savior.
Nietzsche suffered by being seriously
misinterpreted at the hands of his sister, who
tried to turn him into a conventional great
man. Much subsequent commentary took this
rendition for granted, and did not go back and
check the quotations from the works
themselves. The self interpretations in EH
are therefore particularly valuable, even though
some of them are mysterious and obscure.
[There is a great deal of self aggrandisement]
including embarrassing references to the great
value of Zarathustra.
Nietzsche was hostile to what he took as being the
cultural characteristics of the Germans - rather
vulgar, lacking depth, militarist, nationalist and
colonial, even racist and anti-semitic, especially
in his The Case of Wagner, or rather the
brief account of it in here. The criticisms
of Wagner are severe, but also 'imbued with
gratitude and love—with amor fati, love of
fate [later cited as making it impossible to
criticize or regret anything that was necessary]
'. Nietzsche has Zarathustra say that it is
important to learn from enemies, to see that
they've done us some good. N's stance
extends to attempting to triumph over ressentiment
rather than bearing a grudge against the
unfairness and unfortunate accidents of the world.
Dionysus is contrasted with the crucified god, the
Jesus that has escaped from history and been
idealised, turned into an ascetic enemy of the
world. The criticism of Socrates similarly
demystified him and pointed out his flaws.
Malice was identified in Goethe. Nietzsche
attempted to overcome any resentment in his own
character by sublimating it, turning it to more
positive ends. Any negative statements that
remain are better seen as directed against
obstructions towards the development of life and
creativity. It is essential to take on
infamy, including any infamy in
Christianity. Kaufmann thinks that Nietzsche
has not been entirely successful in keeping
resentment out of these criticisms, however.
Nietzsche's classical background is also apparent,
for example in his portrait of Aristotle
especially his support of the 'great souled'
person who deserves recognition. Nietzsche
also gets some of the humourous bits from the
Greeks.
The main theme is celebrating Dionysus, who
becomes 'the symbol of the affirmation of life
with all its suffering and terror', a different
account from Christian theodicy, and a particular
angle on the meaning of tragedy, which had always
involved affirmation.
Ecce Homo
The first problem might well be dealing with the
titles of the opening chapters: 'Why I Am So
Wise', 'Why I Am So Clever', 'Why I Write Such
Good Books',and 'Why I Am a Destiny'. When
you get into reading these, it's not quite so
bad. Nietzsche explains that his family
background was partly drawn from the aristocracy
of Germany and Poland, clearly implying that there
are some hereditary gifts of insight and
aristocratic spirit. He acknowledges that
there is an hereditary illness as well. We
also get a lot of stuff about the importance of
'physiology' , health, diet, climate, and what
might be called mental hygiene. The bits I
liked in particular include the need to avoid
scholastic system which is tedious and
pettifogging - Nietzsche realised that his career
as a philologist was getting him down and
stultifying him and was very glad to use illness
as a pretext to resign his professorship and
travel to more stimulating climates in Italy and
France,where he gradually recovered his health and
found his voice in various ecstatic [manic?]
moments. He also practiced mental hygiene in
the sense that he did not read very much: he was
avoiding the distraction of listening to other
voices or reading them, in order to let his own
dazzling insights emerge. We are urged not
to engage in any soporifics, whether this is
alcohol or the usual comforting beliefs including
dabbling in the more sentimental bits of
Wagner. In particular, he liked walks in the
mountains and in the fresh air. His comments
about the Germans being so stodgy partly come from
this much more stimulating atmosphere in Southern
Europe.
We also get the major themes that we have
misunderstood the notions of 'good' and 'bad', so
we need to move beyond them, and a general
critique of idealism, and asceticism in
particular, as developed in the notes on the Genealogy.
He wants to stress that the human condition, in
all its faults, is nothing to feel guilty about,
and that we do not need to idealise saints,
saviours or ascetic ways of life to rescue us:
what such idealizations actually do is to degrade
humanity. He thinks that the new man will
emerge - Zarathustra, with his critiques of
the old idols and his rather manly stance towards
life and all its vicissitudes. He is
particularly proud of that book.
He briefly summarizes the other books, and I see
what Kaufman means by saying that some of the
summaries are pretty baffling, more like
additional comments. However, Genealogy
of Morals is pretty well summarized.
Nietzsche distinguishes between his necessarily
negative books where he criticizes an awful lot of
received opinion, displaying courage and risking
misunderstanding, and the more positive ones where
he is urging us to be affirmative towards life and
so on.
The book ends with N saying he knows he will be
taken as an explosive thinker, but he wants no
followers, because that would make his thought
into a religion. He admits he might be a buffoon
but still claims to be the voice of truth,
rejecting all the lies before. But it is an
affirmation as well as a critique -- first we have
to destroy, including the old systems of morality,
which hide the truth, criticize and negate --hence
he is an open 'immoralist'. You need 'intestinal
fortitude' (328) to do this, to be a Zarathustra.
We have to go beyond the idealizing of the good
and altruistic, beyond decadent Christian
morality. Seeing goodness as the essence of
humanity is a lie. The terrible bits of existence
are necessary. Naive optimism is harmful, suitable
only for herd animals and beautiful souls. A
codified religion of the good is the beginning of
the end. We should welcome 'evil' as a necessary
stage -- and all the manly virtues have been
described as evil. Superhuman virtues are now
required -- naturally this will terrify the normal
man and appear as evil. Yet this metaphor is
needed so we can rise above Christianity and its
'slander of the world' (331).
This is psychology replacing traditional
philosophy, and it is his destiny to announce it
and to expose Christian morality in this
provocative way, in interests of life itself.
Christiniaty has dominated discussions of morality
yet it has led to mendacity, vanity and malignance
of the will. It celebrates 'antinature' (332) ,
teaching us to despise life, including sexuality (
seen as unclean), self-love as bad rather than
necessary, the decline of the instincts in the
name of a false 'selflessness' [earlier,N argues
that self-empowering action is the salvation of
humanity] .Christianity marks the decadence of
humanity and its decline and the rise of the
parasitical priest. Christian morality is 'the
idiosyncrasy of decadents with the ulterior motive
of revenging oneself against life' (333). Anyone
who sees that is a [sic] destiny. The revaluation
of values is necessary -- 'true' means
'harmful','improving' humanity means sucking its
life blood, God becomes the 'counterconcept of
life' (334), the invention of the soul means we
despise the body, sin and its paired concept 'free
will' means mistrusting instinct, duty means
self-destruction, the good man is someone who is
'weak, sick, fail[ing], suffering' (335).
Celebrate Dionysus, not the Crucified!.
back to social theory page
|
|