Nietzsche has come up in a few conversations lately. It inspired me to read the Nietzsche I’ve been wanting to read for some time now. I was dissapointed, to say the least.
His The Case of Wagner is likely the worst bit of commentary on art I’ve ever read, excepting perhaps the occasional LiveJournal/myspace rant about recent literary dissapointments of ppl with no art crit. aspirations.
Nietzsche’s “critique” of Wagner’s work is shaped by a sad, petty set of adjectives: “idiotic/stupid,” “sick,” “subversive,” and “evil.” These are the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse for criticism- they herald the logical humiliation of the critic by the criticized work. They are in fact an admission. The reasonless, visceral hatred of any work has its place. I hate Elvis. We all suffer this. It has no place in lit/art criticism.
Besides these… charges, Nietzsche ascribes to Wagner many, many things: power, genius, pre-eminence in his contemporary field, etc. So, if we must discount his pathetic insults from the work, all we are left with are tacit praises of Wagner!
These are the only other accusations Nietzsche manages to bring: Wagner lacks melody in comparison to Bizet and his music is generally ugly. Anything lacks melody in comparison to Bizet! Carmen is in fact little but a sequence of melodies. There is more to a grand orchestral narrative of a proud nation than its whistle/sing-along-appeal, is there not? Wagner makes a point of this, quite blatantly. Nietzsche ignores it. As far as ugliness… how can this be criticism? Nietzsche looks something like an old, bitter Icarus falling from the lit. crit. heights of The Birth of Tragedy to this painful end.
It has been said that “Nietzsche was Symbolism’s philosopher, Wagner it’s composer.” Wagner was a Symbolist. They were both decadents. Nietzsche *nearly* achieved the Symbolist aesthetic philosophical master-piece in The Birth of Tragedy, but failed. Ultimately, he mistook Symbolism’s relationship to Classicism. He took Puvis de Chavannes to be a naïve Giotto, Gauguin to be a hasty Raphael, and forgot al about Redon, Klimmt, Munch, and Dennis, amongst others. Saddly, he took Moreau and Khnopf at face value.
I refrain from calling him stupid nonetheless. He was purposeful. He knew what he wanted. In the end, the inventor of the übermensch may have suffered an excess of that “nostalgia for unity” he pretended to despise.
I think I will leave Nietzsche here. I had intended to do a more in-depth reading of his works, but I am already tired. There is a new decadence to exploit, and I have no time to reasonlessly whine about degradation, ugliness, low-class, etc. I want to move, move decisively on this indeffinite path towards a supposed future and move others with what I do.