SEMIOTEXT(E) INTERVENTION SERIES © Editions Suhrkamp, Frankrt This translation© 201 by Semiotext(e) All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without prior permission of the publisher. Published by Semiotext(e) 2007 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 27 Los Angeles, CA 90057 w.semiotexte.com
h h h OOh Fh Nzh� Dh Wm ugu Thanks to John Ebert. Design: Hedi El Kholti ISBN 97-1-55-099- Distributed by The MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass. and London, England Printed in the United States of America
Tasatd by tv Crra
mix() trv srs
Contents
Introduction
7
Gspels-Reatins
The Fifth
Ttal Spnsrg
47
Of Ss a Hmas
Ntes
Tdy n he yer 000 n he hundredh nnversry f hs physcl deh he dwn f he rs f he mllenn he sd wuld hve be ded er hm hw re we spek bu Fredrch Nezsche? Ough we sy h he snds bere us suerng nd gre lke he cenury whch he belnged wh ll hs exsence nd u f whch e erupe n e eerny url renwn Ough we dp hs wn judgmen h he ws n mn bu dynme? Ough we emphsze nce gn he peculry f hs eecve hsry": he c h never bere hs n uhr nssed s much n dsncn nd ye rced such vul gry? Ough we dgnse h ws wh hm h he er f nrcsssm begn rs n evdence s he nsurrecn f he msses" hen s cllecvs gre plcs" nd nlly s he dcrshp f he
7
lbal markt Ouht w t acct th clam that he hsr f cemc hlshy ens wh hm nd hen hstry f he r f hnkng begns? Or ught w t rean m makng cmmntares and red Netzsche and rread hm I wuld lke t descrbe the Netzsche-vent s a catastrph n th hstry f lanuag and put the arument ha hs nervenn s lerry new evngels cnsues n ncsn n l Eure's cntns f unerstanng. Wh Mrshll Mc undrstandn btwn uhan I ru ppl n sctsabv all what thy ar and cheve n generlhs n autlasc meanng. These cndns f cmmuncn prvd grus wh reundnc n whch he cn vbre. The mprnt n such grus th rhythms and mdls by whch thy are abl t recgnze thmselves nd by whch they repet thmselvs as alms th sam. Thy prduc a cnsensus n whch thy prrm th trnal rturn f th sam n th rm f a spkn sng. Languags ar nstruments f rup nrcsssm led s s une nd retune he ler; he mke her sekers rng n sngulr tnltes f self-xctatn. They are systems f meldes r recgnn whch alwys delnate th whl prgram as well. Languages r nt used r wht s td called th pssng n f nrmatn but srve t rm
8
communicating group-bodies. People possess lan guage so that they can speak of their own merits []and not least of the unsurpassable merit of being able to talk up these merits in their own language. First, and r the most part, people are not concerned to draw each other's attention to states of airs, but aim instead to incorporate states of afirs into a glor The dierent speaker-groups of historyall the various tribes and peoplesare self-praising entities that avail themselves of their own inimitable idiom as part of a psychosocial contest played to gain advantage r themselves. In this sense, bere it becomes technical, all speaking serves to enhance and venerate the speaker; and even technical discourses are committed, albeit indirectly, to gloriing technicians. Languages of self-criticism are also borne by a nction of self enhancement. And even masochism works to announce the distinctiveness o the tortured indi vidul. en used in accordance with its constitutive nction of primary narcissism, language says one and the same thing over and again: that nothing better could have happened to the speaker than, precisely, to have been who he is, to have been who he is at this place and in this language, and to bear witness to the merit of his being in his own skin. The ct that primary narcissism rst became observable with ethnic groups and kingdoms bere
lCU l;
ece eue , l wt weons n csscs t te wn o moern times, is something I will consider om historica viewoint. As r the individul, the wait would be lengthier bere self-armation could step out of the shadows of sin. It did this in the rm of amourprpre in the 1 8th century, o holy sel iterest [Sebstsucht] in the 1 9th, that o narcissism in the 20th, nd tht o sel-design in the 21st. Nietzsche was probably the only theoretician of lue f de ies hve hd this nda mental reltion in mind. For, in deriving rayer om eole's exhilration at its own sel-ssertion, he states: it projects the pleasure it takes in itself ( ...) into a being that it can thank r all of this. Mn is gratel r himsel: and this is why one needs a god." And, in a more general way, we can read in an earlier text: It is beautil lly, speaking: with it humans dance over all thigs." In the reconstruction of religious aects om sel-reerentil gratitude, languge comes to be determined as a medium enabling those that speak to say out loud the resons why they are on to. This is why the roession o ith in one's own modu vvend is the most distinguished seech-act. It is the eulogistic gesture par exceence With this derivation o distinction, seech nd silence re dened as odes o exhilaration, which coness to
themselves. In both what is advanced is a voluntary declaration of success in the pursuit of Being: in speech as manifestation of right and power; and in silence as an authorized quiet whose presuppositions require no defending. Quite clearly, this rudimentary reference to a lin guistics of jubilation or self-armation stands in sharp contrast to all that has been said and con ceived about languages by the theorizing communs opno of the last century, regardless of whether this took the rm of ideolog critique or analytic philosophy, discourse theory or psychoanalysis, a theory of the encounter or deconstruction. The rst case set about unmasking all the misleading gener alizations of the languages of the bourgeoisie; the second gave priority to turns of ordinary lan ue over metahsical the third, made a relation between the language games of knowledge and the routines of power; the urth undermined signs through the unconscious con tents of expression; the penultimate case described the language event as a response that is provoked or resed by the call to me of the other-in-need; while the last case brought rward evidence to show that we always il in attempts to impose the l presence of meaning on what is said. In all these cases language is understood as a medium of lack and distortion,
possibly also as the organ of over-sensitiveness and compensaton, o settng cams and therapy. Everywhere language and the spoken appear as symptms and prblems. Hardly ever are they cn ceived of as vectors of armations and prophecies. But when they are, it s to underscore the nau thentic and awed character f all laudatory and promise-making srts of tunes. oever speaks in the conditions permttedwhether om a bour geois, political, academic, legal, or psychological perspectivewill always be in th inus and run around in van seeking the means by which to pay o and shi overdrawn assertions. ever speaks ncurs debt; whoever speaks rther, discourses in order to pay back. The ear is educated in order so as not to gve away credit and t interpret its avarice as critical consciousness. In what llows I will endeavor to reprise the Nietzschean idea of lan guage, the beginnings of which Nietzsche nly sketched, and to extend them into the ture m a cntemprary standpointwhereby I hazard the ramicatin that Nietzsches maxim, according t whch all our philosophy s the correcton of linguistic usage," is charged with meanings that go beyond all crticist cnceptins.
12
GO SPELS-REDACT O NS
First we must take a step back and clari the con trast between the conditions of modern language and those of pre-modern language. As cultures reached the level of monarchyI say this having no particular belief in the dogmatic presupposi tions of sociological evolution theoryit went without saying that languages self-laudatory energies cou no onger e aime iretly at orator who were specialized in nction of public speech, such as the elder, the priest, the rhapsodist. Rather, they had to take a detour and praise the lords, heroes, gods, powers, and rces of virtue, om which a reacting ray came to ll on the orator. In udal times, poets and rhetoricians were schooled in the grammar of indirect eulogy; their job was to be skilled at generating higher feelings, in which the extolled stood in the center
13
and the singers on the sidelines. Their discretion require them to e hume to o what was required r the mood of their own roya space. Precisely to the extent that high cutures in times gone by outawed an orator's direct expressions of egotism they showed with the linguistic brio of primary narcissism ways whereby dutilly manifestin an enthusiasm r the big other one cou pace onesef cose to the recipient of praise. This can scarcey be more egiy studied than in Christian Eangelization an is encroachment on European societies' conditions of understanding in the early Middle Ages. Shown with particular carity here is the way in which Evangeist speech actsthe preaching of savation y God's son and the swearing-in of an ethnic commune r a participation this sphere that is as unequivocal as possieput speakers and isteners alike into an oscillating circuit which was about nothing other than celebrating a shared privilege. In his book of the Gospels Otid von Weienburg Rhine Franconian poet-priest of the 9th century justie his vernacuar adaptation of the New Testament by arguing that the Franks too ouht at last to be allowed access via a poeticized bible to the sweetness of the Good News ducedo evangeorum
s many persons ndertake to write in their lan gage and as many strie with feror to praise what they hold dear why shold the Franks be the only ones to shrink om the attempt to proclaim the praise of God in the Franconian langage let the praise of God be sweet to yo, then Franconian will also be determined by metrical feet, qantity and metrical rles; better, then God himself will speak thro gh yo (Liber evan g elorium , V ;
The sense of these reections, unique r time, lies in an ethno-narcissistic operation by means of which the Franks were to be rmed, at the level of the linguistic techniques of the time, as a collective with higher feelingswith the claim to being equal or even superior to those great historical peoples, the Greeks and the Romans. Gospel verse in the German language is presented as an oensive, the aim of which is to establish a politico-religious system of boasting that, by virtue of a catch-up lesson in rhyme and rhythm, plugs into t he art of the poetically possible. The point thus being that, in ture, in the image of the gora Francorum, an eective link would no longer be missing between the veneration of God and the poetics of Empire. In the same spirit,
15
Otie ttributes to Luwi en Deutschen in s ecaton to m, a ran equa to Kng Dav. Moreover, n this speech act two eulogistic nctionsprise of the ing n glorction of the peoplecome together to rm sngle enhncement-eect. Oti ws convince he thus complie wth the essence of language, insmuch as anguage s per se an nstrument of eulog. Ths may be most convncngly proven in the case of prsing Go: He, n eect (Go), hs gven them (the people) the instrument of lnguge (ectrum nguae) so that they cause him to soun in ther prse" (Deicaton to Lutberg). One who praises becomes worthy of prise insor s he or she also partcpates n the glory of the object of eulogy. The poet expresses the same iea n his introuctory pryer to the Gospel epic. Yo alone are the master of all the langages that exist Yor power has conferred langage to all and they hae comeo salation!to rm words in their langages to recall Yor memory r to praise Yo r eternity, recognize Yo and sere Yo (Liber evn g eliorum, , ,
Remarkble in ths ppel s not only the ct tht knowlege s lso put at the service of the eulo gstc nction; but lso tht the lnguges of
humanity as a whole are dened as media of God's narcissism, which passes via the detour of human idiom back to God himself in unending self-celebration. With God self-praise is a perme. The meaning of language is to celebrate, and any language that might rget to celebrate would have taken leave of its senses. The only awkward thing about this theo-linguistic arrangement is precisely that God must be celebrated in Old High German, in a ngua agrests or peasant idiom that did not wholly conrm to the gram matical and melodic norms of divine relations to themselves. Otid had to muster all his Franconian pride to nd the courage to praise God in the South ine Franconian dialect. Even though it did not occur to him to improve the Gospel as such, he thus saw all the more clearly the need to render the teotsk3 vernacular compa tible with the Gospel through poetic amendment an idea om which would come one of the main linguistic creations prior to Luther's translation of the Bible. Let's note that in taking up the project Otid felt no need r justication in rming a continuous linear narrative of the canonical Gospels. In his time, in which a lay reading of the Holy Writings was not something open to debate, syncretistic-didactical rms such as the so-called Gospel harmonies were well introduced
and suciently legitimated as a sacred genre. a a arrae r aan e yran a also apt r a noble Franc. What the author instead seemed to deem worthy of justication was the articulation of his Gospel epic in ve books: These e of which jst spoke if hae diided them ths een thogh are only r books of the Gospel this is becase the holy rectitde of their nmbering r sancties the irrectitde of or e senses and transrming all that is immoderate in s carries it o toward heaen hateer it is that we miss ia si ght odor toch taste and hearing : ia the remembrance of the texts of the Gospels (eorum lectionis memoria), we pri orseles of or corrption
Here again, hat seemed to require improvement a naurally no the Gopel itelf, bu rather the readership and the listeners who approach the beatiing text as Franks and humans with their natural quintuplet sensuality, and hoif we are to believe he oetthu require ve books of Gospel poetry in German rather than the ur original Gospels. Thi eisode in he history of the German language played out about 1010 years bere Nietzsche's
own self-declaration, while the next example om the history of self-praise relations in western tradition refers to a case that is separated by a mere seventy or eighty years om the intervention of the teacher of the eternal return. The issue here still has to do with improving the Gospelbut this time the mode is considerably more compli cated, since what now enters the reground, at the same time as collective self-praise, are concerns about individual self-enhancement. The scene of the experiment is the United States of America around 1810, and the Gospel redactor is none other than the redactor of the American Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jeerson, who at this time was able to look back on several terms of oce as minister to France and as vice president of the USA, as well as on two mandates as resident. After his years of service in Washinton, he returned home to his manor in Monticello, Virginia, and devoted himself to rounding out the image of himself he intended to leave to posterity. These indications are enough to support the notion that what we bear witness to here is an eminent case of national-religious linguistic pragmatism, especially as we know that to this day the United States represents the most rtile collective of self-celebration of all the current political entities in the concert of nations"; it
cul ls s s sc ws unng contons ncue smantlng as r as possble al l cultural nhbtons aganst the use f enhancing superlatives in a democratic self reference. What is the USA if not the product of a Declartin f Inepenenceom umility (and doutless nt only om te Britis Crwn) There can be lttle wonder, then, about the e cacy wth whch, as we shall see, the Chrstan message is aapted to the needs ofAmerican glory. l ung is st psidntil mandate in Washington, Jeerson would busy himself on his spare nghts, using scissors to cut out extracts om a series of editions of the New Testament in Greek, Latin, French, and English, which he then pasted together nto a scrap book to make a new arrangement of the Gospels. The aim was one he'd held r some tme, and rst emerged durng hs correspondence wit Unitrin telgin nd writer Joseph Priestly, in 179. In all lkelhod , however, the task ws not completed until around 1820, aer many years of nterrupton. The product f this cut-and-paste work, which Jeerson com plet twice-ver, ws given te title The Li and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth and has ecome known as The Jeerson Bible In his scissr work, the redactor must have been convnced that he possessed the criteria by whch to distinguish
20 I
the utilizable om the non-utilizable in the bequeathed text. As a representative of the American Enlightenment thinkers, with their decorative monotheism and Philadelphian exu berance, Jeerson testies to the state of the Gospel problem at the apex of this current of thought. With this Christian-humanist gentleman, it becomes clear that the need r a self-enhancement using the classic reservoirs of meaning was as alive as ever, but could only be satised by expunging vast passages of the historical Gospels. In the wake of the American and French Revolutions, anyone wanting still to play the language game of the Gospels to advantage had above all to be able to omit. This is t he meaning of neo-humanism: to be able to eliminate in the old Gospel that which has become incompatible with one's own glorication as a humanst and ctzen. For ths oeraton, no image is more impressive than that of an American head of state in his oce at night, who, with scissors, cuts out pages o m six copies of the New Testament in ur dierent languages and pastes the extracts into a private copy of the Good News that is designed to conrm to the demands of contemporary rationality and sentimentality r a citable, excerpted version of the Bble. It is characteristic of Jeerson's philosophical ambi tions that he did not el that this redaction of
GRo 21
t oplor put t t rmulton of an atrat or a uas a heresy n the orgnal meanng of the term nsor as hare refers to a chooy nolence appled to totlty of dogm and tradtons. Rather he presented hmelf as the curator of the rtngs' true content re-establshng a pure text aganst the dgng perrmed by ltr dton Wth enrgetc navety the enlghtened redactor ent about eparatng Jeus' unacceptable ords om those that Jesus must have ad, had he anted to be approvngly cted by Jeerson; even better om those that Jeus ould have sad had he reseen the tranrma ton of belevers nto sympathzers. In ct the modern sympathzer ofJesus can be dened as the bearer of Euro-Amercan Enlghtenment as one ho places value despte all the connectons to the Chrstan tradton on remanng thn the contnuum of orldly possbltes of self enhancement that ere developed snce the Renassance. And ths s precsely hat Jeerson had n mnd hen he endevored to cut out the vald resdue, that hch s ctable even among humansts om the embarrassng mass of Ne Testament phrases. As such n October 1813, Jeeron felt he could send to John Adams the llong report of success:
Thr wll b und rmann h mos sublm and bnvoln od o morals whh has vr bn ord o man hav prrmd hs opraon r my own us, by un vrs by vrs ou o h prnd book, and arrann, h mar whh s vdnly hs, and whh s as asly dsnushabl as damonds n a dunhll Th rsul s an oavo of ry-sx pas, o pur and unsophsad dorns 5
In a letter addressed to the erudite religious and Dutch Unitarian, Francis Adrian van der emp, Jeerson explained himself in a more detailed manner about his relationship with Jesus the man: s h nnon o Hs harar, h pury and sublmy o Hs moral prps, h lo un o Hs nulaons, h bauy o h apolous n whh H onvys hm, ha so muh admr; somms, ndd, ndn nduln o asrn hyprbolsm My ulos, oo, may b undd on a posula whh all may no b rady o ran mon h sayns and dsourss mpud o Hm by Hs bora phrs, nd many passas o n manaon, orr moraly, and o h lovls bnvo ln; and ohrs, aan, o so muh noran, so muh absurdy, so muh unruh, harlaansm
23
and mposur as o pronounc mpossbl ha suh onradons should hav prodd om h sam Bn spara, hrr, h old om h dross; rsor o Hm h rmr, and lav h lar o h supdy o som, and roury o ohrs o Hs dspls 6
In view of this declaration it makes little sense to mantan along wth The Jron e' edtor Forrester Church that the wse man of Monticello merely sought the intelligible Jesus and necessarily missed the historical one. Jeerson was after nei ther an historical nor an intelligible Jesus but rather an obj ect of eulogy which by giving praise to it and thus having recourse to shared moral values would enable the speaker to come out a sure-re wnner. Jeerson was after a spirtual master who could be cted to guarantee advantage and who would permit the laudator to become a prestge shareholder by drawing on the holy source of values. er the mental caesura of the Enlghtenment an unabrdged verson of the New Testament could delver no such expectatons of symbolic prots and r this reason any rational redactor had to expunge om the corpus of stories and words of evangelical authority all that would compromise him in ont of other rational beings and land him in the mire of sectarianism or
4 etzce
what amounts to the same thing, of cognitive loserdom. For absolutely similar motives, and with similar means, Leo Tolstoy would later put together a private version of the New Testament and present it as a sort of Fifth Gospel": the Russian path toward the coexistence of evangelism and the Enlightenment. The Moderns no longer know of evangelists; they know only of the classics. Citing a classic guarantees a sure, albeit modest, return; on the contrary, if, in society, you invoke the Redeemer, your credit will shrink. The Enlightenment is really a language game r cognitive winners, who continually deposit the premiums of knowledge and critique in their accounts, and exhibit their cultural nds, while ith gets increasingly hidden behind a barrier of embarrassment, to be crossed only when one is among like-minded others, and, moreover, is ready to give up the advanced boasting potential of the Enlightenment. But Jeerson was not a man to burden himself with embarrassment or with language games r losers. As a result, in his redaction of the Holy Scriptures r Enlighten ment winners, all the threatening and apocalyptic discourses of Jesus are rcibly absent, as are most of the stories about miraculous cures and resurrec tionhis purged Gospel ends when a few of Jesus's iends roll away the stone in ont of the
to o o o thr w. A txt-copor eerson errs e erary eratve o Modernity: Where legend existed the new ust coe! At take now i to wap all acred agents r terretrial heroe. Jus can only be th hero of a novel or a participant n dicoure. I a gnral wy th odr trut to hro ce a coplcang cor naely hat eulogstc nctons are ncreangly dependent on cientc preie and ust ati the dictates of poltcl corrct. Nowdy you alway have to have in vew th ide-eect of each tribute and to calculat the angle of reaction of inrct elf-enhanceent. But the an rul is that all eulogistic reark have to be ontologically correct and that no cla are ade of actual intervention o trancendence into ianence. Th lway r boating hrink; the trategy of inrect slf celebration in high culture hit the invetor wth ever greaer costs and diinishing narcissistic return. Suing up thi state of aair i the er huans such as ethcsts use it today: to speaker t uggt the return to a carelly condred sort of self-araton that is only barely ditinguishable o ediu-level depre on. Twenteth-ctury cultur woul rt by dscon deignat a way out of thi nctig elpraie o rarkabl perrc
26
and other things, admiration of which was based on superior criteria. This disconnection thus enabled primitive elings of exhilaration to step onto the restage where a public of accomplices in disinhibition awaited, intent on cheering. For Jeerson, these kinds of relief were not yet in sight. He had to continue to tie his eulogistic brio to the holy texts, and, by means of redemptive abstracts, to revert to elevated examples of the tradition in order to satis cultural demands r discourses about higher feelings. He could thus write to one of his correspondents: I am a Christian, in the only sense He wished any one to be; sincerely attached to his doctrines, in preference to all others; ascribing to himself every human excellence...." What speaks r Jeerson is that his hypocrisy is spontaneous and coherent. His grasping at the diamonds in the dunghill of tradition illustrates a growing American selectiveness as regards the heritage of old Europe. The importation of meaning om Jerusalem, Rome, Geneva, and Wittenberg also had to clear American customs. Jeerson's redaction of the Gospels teaches us that the preconditions r winning avowable posi tions of privilege stemming om Christian tradition already became problematic nearly a century prior to Nietzsche's own intervention. What, in western culture r over one and a half millennia, had
27
been the pure and simple and oen also protable oo Newsthe cree r amittng people into the other-worldly God's system of likeness increasingly proved to be a losing game r the messenger: the conditions of transmission r messages of this type had been transrmed; the speaker of such news appeared too clearly as someone who had not yet properly learned the procedures o modernity to be able to take up the word to advantage.
THE FIFTH
On February 13, 1883 in Rapallo, Friedrich Nietzsche, then aged 38, composed a tacticlly stlized letter to his editor, Ernst Schmeitzner in Chemnitz: Dars Hrr Vlr, Today hav somhn ood o announ: hav mad a dsv spand man by h way, suh a sp as should also b usl o you s a mar o a small work (barly a hundrd prnd pas), h l o whh s Thus Spok Zarahusra Book r ll and Non s a "pom, or a h "Gospl or som hn or ohr r whh hr s no y a nam: by r h mos srous bu also h mos hrl o my produons, and assbl o vryon So hnk ha wll hav an "mmda
29
prl e se yer, esce wre Malvda vn Meysenbug n Rme: s a baul sor: hav hallnd all h rlons and mad a nw "hol book! nd, sad n all srousnss, s as srous as an ohr, vn houh norporas lauhr no rlon2
On May 24 n a letter t Karl Hllebrand Netzsche ade the llwng remark abut the rst par f h: Evrhn ha had houh, surd, and hopd r s n and n a wa ha m l wans now o appar o m as jusd nd hn aan l ashamd br msl: sn hav hrb srhd ou m hand r h hhs arlands vr awardd o human 3
A year later Netzsche's ears were stll rngng wth ths expressn f reachng r the hghest garlands," whch s hencerth attrbuted t the use the lsh and lse language f the ambtos4 All hs crrespdece e Zarathustra perd s sht thrugh wth mcr-evangelc news abu hs cncludng a wrk that had weghed hevly n the mnd f s authr as smethng f cmprable vlue. A hs te, was he
Italian and the Swiss Postal Services that under took to the Good News." Nietzsche's break with the old-European evan gelic tradition makes discernible how, om a certain degree of enlightenment, speech's nctions of indirect eulogy can no longer be secured with the compromises of deism or cultivated Protestantism. Anyone seeking a language that secures the speaker the attribution of every human excellence,'' or at least the guarantee of indirect participation in supreme advantages, has to develop strategies of expression that surpass the eclecticism of a Jeerson. As in communication among the moderns" embarrassment is hardly avoided simply by cutting out compromising reports of miracles, it is no longer done. It is no longer enough to bypass all the maledicent apocalypses and prophetc com minations, the pronouncing of which will unmask absolutely anyone speaking bere a secular or humanist-inuenced public. Would anyone be able to refer, in society, to an authority such as the Jesus of Mark 9.42, who thought it right to say: Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better r him if a great millstone were hung around his neck and he were thrown into the sea." A commentator writing in the year of 1 888 contented himself with saying: How evangelical!"5 Scissors can no loner save a
31
r' l- wh r h oo nesa n a, gspe resue prves unae t wthstan serous scruny. Not even the process f emyholozato can set one straight n one's et. Too im, too suspect, too inferior are the sources om which the beauil dscurses issue. Expressns of iscontent wth its glwering un vrals a is enace-laen benevolence can n nger e sguse in he long term. So, f good news" remaned pssble an the condtns f r hrouh a ch of winers coul e realzed, then it ould have to e reconsttuted. It would have o be new enouh to avoi ebarrassing siilarites with texts that ha becoe unaccepable, but smilar enough so that it coul be perceive a least as a rmal extension of the stock-stanard ospel. Thi is th reason why he w racio o a iscourse, oe able to be proclaie, an hch the speaker could ank n making a prot, culd e rst otane nly thrugh the subver sn of earlier rms: the man who can proise anew s ne who says somethng unheard-of wth new wrds. But Netzsche d nt want to be a mere Gospel parost; he ot wat merely to synthesze Luther h he dhyram and sap Mosaic ables r Zarathusra oes. Raher, r him he oin was ha he coios pertaii to professins of h a he cha of caos
32
be given an entirely new order; better, that the distinction between a profession of ith and a citation be revised. The author of Zarathustra to lay bare the eulogistic rce of language om the ground up, and to ee it om the inhi bitions with which resentment, itself coded by metaphysics, had stamped it. This intention resonates in Nietzsche's seeking to assure his iend Franz Overbeck that this book I have over come everything that has been said in words." d it is presupposed when he states, still addressing the same addressee I am now, very probably, the most ndependent man n Europe6 The heightor better the operating theater of this independence is the result of an insight that Nietzsche, ever since the days of Human A too Human, had made during an aggressive spiri tual exercise that he carried out on himsel The author of The Gay Scence was convinced that resentment is a mode of production of world, indeed one that is to date the most powerl and most harml. The more keenly this discerning author contemplated the matter of this ct, the more comprehensively and monstrously it came into profile in everything that had borne the name of high culture, religion, and morality, the resentment mode of world-building had pre vailed. Everything that r an epoch had been able
T'
/ 33
ee elf e l wld rder bre its anwrtng. tat a n s era came to be making a contribution t o world improvement had drunk of its poison. Whence the catastrophic conclusion, which hit its thinker as a millenary insight: that all languages rmed by metaphysics gravitate around a misological core. The classic teacins of wisdom, tother wth their modern connector-theores, are systems r maligning beings in their entirety. They serve those who have ye bece fed up wit deing te wrld, power, and human beings, and have as their goal the abasement of the happy and powerl, and of self-praising attitudes. When all is said and done, all high cultures between Asia and Eurpe have consistently spoken the language of peple w are ut t take advantage of life itsel What as hitherto been called morality is the universalism of vengeance. And whatever metaphysical dis course might carry by way of valid wisdo, science, and worldly sophistication: it is the rst impulse toward maigning realty in the name of an over word or an anti-world, which has been specicaly approved r the sake of humiliating its contrary. Along with this, it is simultaneousy to talk up the nee r vengeance, with which the weak and the olish vaunt their weakness and their olishness. In metaphysical-religius discourse,
contmptuousnss bcoms an insidiously twistd slf-praising rc. That, along with Socrats and Plato, Nitzsch abov all idntid Saint Paul as th gnius of rvrsal nds no rthr lucidating; nithr dos th ct that om th consquncs of th Paulin intrvntion Nitzsch drivs th critrion by which to dn his amndmnt to th ood Nws as th axis r a history of th tur. Against this background, th author of Zarathustra sts out to rmulat th rst link of a mssag chain dsignd to disnabl all mtaphysical lstto. It is a manouvr by which h ls sur of his pochal stanc; h knows that dcoupling tur linguistic currnts om rsntmnt and that rchannling ulogistic nrgis is a world histori cal" act. But h also undrstands that oprations of such magnitud rquir a lot of tim. H considrs his bing unabl to obsrv th consquncs of his kynot part of his martyrdom: I rquir so much of myslf," h wrot om Vnic in May 1884 to Ovrbck, with int slirony, that I am ungrat l vis--vis th bst work that I hav don till now; and if I do not go to such an xtrm that whol millnnia will mak thir loist vows in my nam, thn in my own ys I shall hav achivd nothing." In Sptmbr of th sam yar, h mad
35
ths css t Hch slt "h has meanhe ony the hoy persona sense o beng my book o devoton and encourage mentotherse dark and veled, and grotesque r everyone." A devotonal book," a holy book," a book o ndependence and overcomng, a genune mountan ar book," a testament," a h' Gospe" Netzsche's abes r hs terary son Zarathustra" dra, lke the text tsel, om a nd lr, hch s cvertd r the ne occason. The essenta reason r reprsng ths type o expresson, hoever, s to be und beyond the sphere o rhetorc and parody. Netzsche nrms us that the term Gospel" as such had been lled th lse examples only, snce n the Chrstan tradton hat as ssued as The Good Nes could, gven ts value and atttude n the pragmatcs o language, acheve no more than a trumph o msology. In hs ve, the old Gospel n all ts urness s merely a handbook r the orld n order to benet avengers and the ndolent, a book drated and nterpreted by the poer-hungry caste par exceence o the metaphyscal ages, the prest-theologans, the advocates o nothngness, and ther modern successorsjournalsts and dealst phlosophers; ts texts are resentment propaganda, rrtng
defeats as successes and revelling in inhibited vengeance as a way of subtly and disdainlly oating above texts and cts. Nietzsche's self awareness hangs on the conviction that the role he has been le with involves interrupting the age-old continuum of misological propaganda. A remark om Ecce homo should be applied to the entire complex of metaphysical distortions: ll h "dark mpulss ar a an nd, "ood po pl had vn lss o an da han anyon ls o h rh way nd n all srousnss, nobody br m knw h rh way, h way up: only sarn wh m dd hops, asks, prsrbd pahs r ulur xs aan am h barr o hs lad dns 7
Nietzsche's evangelism thus means: know oneself; take a stand against the millenaries-old rces o reversal, against everything that has been called Gospel to date. He saw his destiny in being a necessarily joyous messenger, such as there has never been bere." His mission was to destroy the communicative competences of the venomous. The h gospel"Nietzsche only puts the noun and not the numeral in inverted commas, and places the expressions poetry" or something r which there is no name" as variants next to it
37
thu im to b contrtiv it contnt bing not negtion s iertion om reity ut rmtion s libertion of the wholenes of li. It is Gopel r thoe no-longer-needing-to-lie gopel of negentropy or of cretivity nd consequentlyon would be the presupposition tht few crtive nd ble to be improved minority gospel rther still: gospel r no one" delivery to unidentile ddressees since there exists no minority regrdless of how smll tht could ccept it mg ddrd dirctly to it. Not r nothing did Nietzsche in the month nd yer er the publiction of the rst three prts of Zarathustra, continuously point out with the melncholy of simultneously ctive nd uthentic chrcter tht he hd not ingle diciple." Thi ttement i only eemingly contrdicted by the ct tht Nietzche chieved hi vitlit'' turn of thought in temporl milieu tht too willingly declred itlf redy to imilte the new lnguge of life rmtion; even the observtion om eective history" ccording to which Nietzsche's deth ws immeditely llowed by wve of demnd tht begn turning Zrthustr into shionble prophet nd the will to power" into pssword r ocil does not repu dite the thesis tht there ws not nd could not be ny dequt ddree r thi gopel." The ron
8
r this is to be sought in the internal economy of the new message, which demands a disproportionate price r access to its privilege of proclamation, indeed an unpayable one. Recipients of the h gospel" incur such high costs that, aer a look at the balance sheet, it can be perceived as bad news. It is no coincidence, then, that its rst herald was already pushed to break away om past and present humanity. It demands of every potential disciple such radical abstinence with regard to tra ditional rms of li-serving illusion and bourgeois cilitation that, should this disciple seriously partake in the new message, the disciple would nd himself alone with an unliveable disillusionment. The odd renewal of eulogistic energies in an alternative linguistic current rst opens onto a proposition designed to transmit via speech an evangel propped up on a dis-evangel"the expression dates om Nietzsche himsel who thus denotes St Paul's actual" teaching. Eugen Rosenstock-Huessy also adopts this term to characterize the major interpreters of reality in the 1 9th centuryMarx, Gobineau, Nietzsche and Freudas the rst dis evangelists" of modern dumbundedness we will speak somewhat more soberly of them as the unders of discursive games about the real. The h gospel" sets out om a work of illu sion-destruction r which there is no parallel. It is
u f Science hch, n truth, s the most desperate scence ever to have been launched, snce t presupposes a level of disenchantment that plunges to almost sucdal depths. It vrtually corresponds to vagus death caused by dsappontment. Netzsche never doubted that there as an ndssoluble relation of producton beteen hs chronc llness and hs lucdty about thngs psychologcal and metaphys cal. Hs on lfe as r hm the experment of c" i ueg e uderstood as redempton r hs cogntons. And the more he pad o, the rther he as carred aay by hs thnkng and states om exstng human commu nties. He dried rther and rther toard an inexorable exterority ith regard to the menda cous condtons of socetes. He looked upon the dols of the trbe, the market, and the cave om a dstance that did not cease to gro. Hs private of the Hyperboreans as a ay of descrbing hs sojourn n the cold as a gay and voluntary exle. He had no rght to beleve that he possessed n ths any shared pont of departure th contemporary readers; stll less could he permt hmself the supposton that he mght nd lloers antng to learn ther lessons n smlar condtons. Hence the persstent rerence to hs tel lonelness; hence his ve of the orld as a
4
door to a thousand deserts, empty and cold." Hence, also, the mistrust he displayed toward anyone who might have dared to tap the author approvingly on the shoulder. In the chapter called The Convalescent," Zarathustra illustrates the price of the new message when in encountering his most abyssal thought" of disgust and disappoint ment he ints and, upon waking, hangs between li and death r seven days. The truth has in truth" the rm of an illness leading to death it is an attack on the aletheiological immune system, which leaves people hanging at the geometrical place of lies and health. hoever wants resist the disruption of the hitherto known economy of illusions, has to be something other than what had been known as known human to datea surviver vaccinated against the madness of the truth. The economic aradox of Nietzsches good news consists in the indication that the primary, immeasurably bad news must be recompensed by an as yet unproven mobilization of creative counter-energies. The overman concept is a wager on the distant possibility of such compensation We have art so that we do not go to ground on the means we have the prospect of the overman in order that unbearable insights into the unveiled human condition may be endured. Such an oer appears as an advertisement r that which inspires
FM 41
terror. This is why the whole of h had to e te rm o n extene ree n ts nrr tv parts, t dals with nothing othr than th hsitation of th hrald br th announcing of his own mssag. Howvr, if on wants to hav chapr accss to nw privilgs of th hrald, rgardlss of cts of terror and xpermntal reservtons and this is th rmla that practcally charac trizs th whol history of Ntzsch rdaction i te atidmocratic movmnt, including its rvisions in dmocratic idology critiqu thn on has to split th nwly won ulogistic nctions om th ncssary nlightnmnt prior to t and its work of dstrcton, and lft th qotation marks om th assword gosl," that is, ras its nwnss and its irony. Nitzsch was awar of th absurd costs of his undrtaking and doubtd on nough whthr rcovring an vanglic-logistic stanc om rfct nihilism rmaind, xistntially spaking, a sn sibl rckoning. In 1884, h wrot to Malvida von Mysnbg hav hns on my soul ha ar on hundrd ms havr o bar han la btise humaine. s possbl ha am a doom, h doom r all ur popland s hnrh vry possbl
42
ha on day wll bom mu, ou o lov r humany!!!
Let's register the three exclamation marks aer the suggested possibility of his lling silent. Every explanation of the Nietzschean message has above all to answer the question of how it is possible that the announcement won out over its internal inhi bitions. This would be tantamount to explaining how the ctors could prevail against the eulogistic motifs in the process of osetting them. And in this revision it would be necessary to examine the calculation as such in its immanent correctness. Does not point to the idea that according to Nietzsche the bad news possesses an edge over the good news that cannot be com pensated r, whereas all attempts to give primacy to the latter are based onl on momentar vigor and temporary self-hypnosis? Yes, isn't Nietzsche thereby exactly the paradigmatic thinker of moder nity insor as it is dened by the impossibility of catching up with the real through counter-ctual corrections? Is modernity not dened by a con sciousness that runs ahead of the monstrousness of cts, r which discourses about art and human rights only ever consist in compensation and rst aid. And r this reason is the contemporary world, rced to admit the superiority of the
ral n n rcl r cl ncaabl ncaab l urn re om hen on. As r as Nietzche is concerned he new very wll that h wul r th time being be the sle reader of Zarathustra be seized by it; his h Gspel" is as h almst rightly says dar and burie buri e an grotsqu grotsqu r r ever everyyn" n " an this is s no only on accoun of it premuriy. It canno e predced how uch a document docume nt which which neces sarily renders anyne rying to pread it grotesque grote sque cul bcm in parur r a nw ulogistic chain in which th spksprsn wul nd o win. A r he ime being nyne pro ssing to want t cite a passage m the fih gospel" renders himslf vn mre infasibl om a burgeis and acamic stanpoint than wul smn attempting t s with th unbridged rm of he r ur. This can in n way b alr by th cnspira cnsp iracy cy f th infasi infasibl bl wh imprvise thir braggart mpire" by appaling t a fw havily istrt an cut up gments f Nietzsche ranslated into banal an national-ppulist national-p pulist languge. languge. No pair of scisso sci ssors rs can sav th cants f Zarathustra r th languag game of he stoc-tandard enlightenmen. Nezche-uncu only opens up o hoe wh are lo enough be ble o reinven the noion of redemptin r themslves. ssuming that Nietzsche
himself had knon this om the startand the biographical and literary evidence speaks in vor of thishat could still make him believe that a ne era of discourse ould begin ith him Ho did he propose to go om the ridiculous to the sublime, om the sublime to eedomand ho could have have done it i t aer him To solve this t his enig e nigma, ma, e ill have to examine in more detail Nietzsche's sketches r an ethics of generosity.
TOTAL SPO NSOR NG
To learn more about Nietzsche's theory and prxis of generosity, it is alsoor above allnecessary to address his megalomania," this an appropriate designation r this author's extraordi nary talent to speak about himself, his mission, and his writings the highest of tones. Perhaps this issue here is one r which the expression aresse to the pusher aout the good news,'' something r which there is yet no name," is once again appropriate. The alternative designa tions used to encompass the rst parts of Thus Spoke Zarathustra, Poem" and Gospel," should also be kept in reserve as a way of qualiing Nietzsche's megalomaniacal remarks. Megalomania, then, or poetry, or something r which there is yet no name: what llows is advisably approached with a provision of alternative
4
exreo, to avo ett tuck wth a ea on reex ha s rs es. he exosure vaue o Netzsche's mos conscuous statements abou hmelf are o exceve that eve the mot vorable, the mot ee-prte reaer, ye eve thoe who are wllngly aze, wll look away om these aage a though not wantng to have perceve, to have countergned, wha has been commtted o aer and u no rnt. I osse o sare xedly nether at the sun nor a he self-rase of the mar th reao we rea thee ubearable outburt of elf-awarene wth elf-prae pro ectve eye-wear. We toe own that whch caot enetrate unltered nto a reader's eye wthout h havng o look away out of a ense of hame r he unbrdled other, or else out of one of tact, whch adve u not to ue the moment whch an exced eron bare hmelf aganst hm. Amog Netzche lover t a mark of ecency ot to cte th ort of thg, t not Toay, however, we mut evate om the orm of the amateur. The ct tht pycht wthut equ pekn n my wrk, th perhp the rt thn d reder w rezethe rt f reder deerve, wh red me d pht red Hrce
Does anyone a he end of he nineeenh cen ury have a ear idea of wha poes in sron aes called inspiraion? f no, will describe i This is my experience of inspiraion; do no doub ha you would need o o back housands of years o nd anyone who would say: "i is mine well2 My Zarahusra has a special place r me in my wriins ih i, have iven humaniy he reaes i i has ever received 3 Leavin aside he poes: perhaps nohin has ever been done wih such an excess of enery Here, my concep of he "Dionysian became he hihes deed; all he res of human aciviy looks poor and limied in comparison The c ha a Goehe, a Shakespeare, would no know how o breahe r a second in his incredible passion and heih all his is he leas ha can be said, and does no ive you any real idea o he dis ance, of he azure soliude his work lives in The collecive spiri and oodness of all rea souls would no be capable of producin a sinle one of Zarahusrs speeches Unil hen, you do no know wha heih, wha deph really is; you know even less wha ruh is isdom, invesiaions of he soul, he ar of speakin none of his exised bere Zarahusra4 an old iend has jus wrien o say ha she is lauhin a me nd his a a momen
T
r g 49
wh u kbl o ibili t
o ewe wr c e ele, l respecl eouh r e Becuse am crryi he desiy of humiy o my shoulders5 he esure yself by wh ca d hve beer claims he word "rea ha y oher morl6 My l wuld hve i h he rs ece hu ei, h w yself e pposi he hypocrisy f illei ws he t o discoer he ruh because was he rs seeo smelllies r wh hey re . . am berer f ld idis s o oe ever ws bere Sri wih e, he earh will kow re pliics . . . 7
I would like to suggest that we dwll a little longe on these unbearable phses and slowly remove the protective eye-wear that has r a cen tury spared readers the need to engage with this eruptive, obscene posion of self-paise and self-objectivization. I make this suggestion on the assumption tht we are dealing not with some subjective disinhibition in the usual sense, or with a morbid way of letting oneself go, or even with traces of puerility, as commentators like Thomas Mann nd Karl Jsprs have discerned in Nietzsche. Against the arementioned backgound oflanguage
50
philosophy it seems plausible to assume here that the dam behind hich the self-eulogistic discursive energies had been accumulating in the most advanced civilizations nally burst in a single indi vidual. Today we enjoy a safe distance of one hundred years that enables us to see these detona tions of self-awareness om sufcient distance. Added to this we benet om a large shi in men tality a shift that traverses the 20th century toward a greater permissiveness in the expression of narcis sistic aects. And nally Nietzsche's description of himself in Ecce Homo as a bufon" suggests the prospect of considering his Dionysian exaggerations om the aspect of voluntary grotesqueness. All this makes it easier to bracket the embarrassment and muster up a bit more courage. I would also like to contend that Nietzsche's narcissism" is less pertinent a phenomenon om the point of individual psycholog than the marker of a cut in the linguistic history of old Europe. At bottom it signies the disclosure of the nature of authorship and literar discourse. The discurse event which bears the name Nietzsche is characterized by the iningement within him of the high between the Good News and culture self-celebrationwhich in addition unveils what it is that a modern author does : he posits the text
m hmel he ecm f gca scurse an ts unatin in the ta weighing n sel-praise are simultaneusly pened up ebae. he leiimizati f this turn can be lene m Niezsche's criique f meaphsics a mrality. In it the rer lies hat in which indirec eulgy is gruned ecmes algether transparent laying bare the mechanisms cntr tin that hve materialized in phrases such as One wh is humble will be elevae" r servir et dis rtre If i rue h his separatin praise m sel is nthi ther han a erment eected thrugh resentmen an everlasti ajurnme the in which an rar cul sa t his wn exisence liger while s ha I c prase yu" ne may thus understand Nietzsche's attacks against discretin as acts revisin that cntradict the traiinal mrality sel-ispssessin in an almst rius way. We must back t late middle-age mysticism t b e le a least m ar t encunter cmparale phenmena. Spectacular an emarrassin as the are the serve resre he pssibility f ri he ms irect lik bewee sel a praise. Wha Niezsche has in mind is nt indistinctly t rejice ver nesel as bare exisence: he eaves wih all his mih he idea that exisence mus earn is exultain r better: tha i has rw it its exultatin. As n
other modern thinker, Nietzsche espouses the adaeqatio ibilationis et intellects If there is any correspondence between its existence and good reputation, an existence must become enhanced to such an extent that the best may be said about it. Existence may well be an a priori chance r self praise; however, self-eulogistic discourse can only become legitimate a posteriori at the level of culture. Between the chance and its realization, the bridge is created by egocentrism"this long maligned dimension in which the best possibilities of humankind were arrested incognito. It is the selsh impulses, insor as they are also work-obsessed, upon which Nietzsche bestows with a philosophical consecration. Belated self-praise condenses the premonition of one's own becoming and the con summation of egocentrism together in the image of self how it is that one becomes what one is, grasping the randomness of being me." The ll" self-image is realized," perhaps, in a moment, when the most ambitious anticipations of one's own ability to become are confirmed with a review of li lived. This is the type of moment spoken of on the single p age inserted at the start of Ecce Homo On his perc day, when everyhin is ripenin and no only he rape urns brown, he eye of
53
t
y ; I ked back I
, v m d a (. . . ) How could I fail to be g ratul to whole l?8
If a life's elevated possibilities increase, self-praise can unld in analogue shion: once again the work raises the master who is poised to disappear into th wor And it is precisey this correspon dence that creates the scandalthis limitless alkn up of manifest and squandered wealth, this jubilatory self-review after the deed done, this complete dissolution of life in luminous positings, which remain as works of language: they rm the counter-oence to the oence of the cross, excaimed by St Paul, with which the blockade against the connection between self and praise was solidied That Nietzsche ttingly assessed the implica tions r the politics of language of his belated embarrassment and interpreted them on a grand historica scale can in ct be seen in the vocabuary of his late texts, in which the expression cynicism" comes conspicuously to the surce Nietzsche, the philologist, was attentive to the ct that his philo sophical battle-cry, the re-evaluation of all values," harked back to a kynical agment that describes the protest strategy of Diogenes of Sinope: recoin
5
/
the money'; he was cognizant o the ct that the appearance he emitted in the texts of 1888 could necessarily seem to be a reemergence of Socrates gone mad." But this is exactly what mattered to him: he pursued the reevaluation of all the source value of embarrassment, the revision of misological manners, the abolition of borders, which, r a whole age, had been drawn between creative lie and its sel-eulogizing rce. So, on the 20th o November, Nietzsche elt able to write to the Danish critic Brandes that: ave talked abot myelf it a cyicim tat ill become orld itorical Te book i called Ecce Homo. . . te ectio of ti book called W I wrte such g ood books Nietzce make te lloi remark abot i ork: tey ometime reac te iet elevatio yo ill d aere o eart, cyicim9
The expression cynicism" used in these passages indicates two directions: the rst is the elevation o questions o diet and health to a level that is quasi evangelicala turn which sums up a good part of the 19th and 20th centuries and already sketches the direction o the 21st in its generality; and the second is the merging o the Good News
i l-l ii i Ta' enn o e wo yn" n evnea" heneh n h pe e he me. A he pot whee the meag teet they g exatl what t that a mode autho doe exhbt oeelf, tam oeelf wtg, e de oneelf able." Netzhe I have eve take a tep publ that dd no ompoe e my eon h." Sgg-oe'-ow pae of a l whh am ad ali tl a att ompoto ght ly een a the only authet duve m ll ble to me the qualato evangelal. A meage th m mply good, whe ad f t ompe te elf-ommuato of the ue lad a ympathzg wth t. It peak the lanuage of a l ha no oly h the ght to make pome bu an alo edoe tand the bgge the ene povoked by the amaton, he moe authen t ouene. One mght ll the lnue-tae of uh l Spozt e they e expeo" the ene hat hey eve to aoue a e of beg. The beah the otat o taditoal bvalet logi, had equed the peke lwy to hooe beween one of two thngethe vouh god, whh wa uavodabl oeted wth te eal of the ego , o vouh the Ego,
56 /
whh tadtoall ould be udetood ol a the ata euato of god. I the ew laguage poto Netzhe peet hmelf ot a a poet edeeme, but tead a a ehe of a ew tpe. Oe ould label Netzhe the t eal poo, o the odto that we devote ome tme to explag h at of gvg g that exeed the ommo doue of g ad poo. Netzhe' poohp of humat tat out wth the aumpto that, b gvg d vdual oda g, oe mplate them a bae eoom th eoom, the ehaemet of the gve evtabl goe had--had wth the oee of the eeve. If aoe eek to gve a moe dtguhed g, t a ol volve the gvg of a uepoable g wth o tg attahed. The oly g meaug up to th amb to the betowal of a ttle of oblt, whh exue the ew beae om the oblgato to efe to the betowe. Wth th vew, Netzhe vet ome take-ad-u g that take the m of aphom, poem ad agumet. Ae Netzhe t poble aoe to beome oble f he e to the poo' hallege. But th doue about ttle of oblt telf povoatve what the poo betow the oppote of a ttle that oe ould bea." The oblt queto hee aot
b lad om a of th hstoal ms of as oay s s etzse's eso thess, amely the dea that the hstoy of humaty s yet to kow al obltexept phaps th mld doy of th gu of Jsus ad th sovg hyge of Buddha Howeve, hs vew the latte aat det ms of gosty, s both a ouded a eteat om the vita activa They ae watg to b outdo by wold-amg, atv atttudes towad lwhee ass th thal madat of at, th t dmso of tue hstoy Fom th o, hstoal oblss pos sssd as a good has o valu, baus what ould b dsgatd as obl udal tms was saely aythg oth tha powe-potetd mass Th abble above, th abble blow"th wods by th volutay bggas about th h ad pow l of th pst momet, to b ud th uth pat of Zarathustra, apply etoatvly to hstoal evde The qual oble a o log be dedd though oveo, to th xtt obl should b th ttl th bth of a dd o a thought basd o a ustl, amg e Noblty s a posto wth spet to the tu tzshe's ovatve g ossts povokg o to gag a wa of b whh th v would tak up a atv as sposo, that s to say, th ablt to op up
rher ture. Netzhe a teaher of geeroty the ee that he fet the repet of h g wth the dea of wealth, whh eearly ot worth aqurg ule wth a vew to beg able to quader t. hoever gve the provoato of g-gvg ha the rght to oder hmelf a beg at the tart of a ew moral toal ha. Thereby tme t etrety ewly terpreted a a delay the ture prolferato of geeroty, htory" aqure otet exe of the aualty that had reged tll the. The ture of humaty a tet of whether t poble to uperede reetmet a the remot htoral re. I the aedg le of g-gvg vrtue, lfe prae telf a a mmeaurable prolferato of hae to be gve. It d the reao r t thakl prae t partpato evet of geeroty. Htory plt to the tme of the eoomy of debt ad the tme of geeroty. herea the rmer thk of repay met ad retalato, the latter tereted oly rward-doatg. Wttgly or otherwe, every lfe wll ture be dated aordae wth th rtero Oe lve bere hm, oe lve after hm..." It pay to take a loer look at the orgal at of the geeroty-ha augurated by Netzhe, e odto of bodg a be ee t, om
To
59
hih it is alo ossibl to da th sol valid o l u o dvd l o illgiiat fs o Nizsh. I i diiv tha th w loo" hai bi ih uo ditiol u of xpdiu, i h iv a oly bah th il of a savigs-aioality though pu slf-xditu. Oly ubilld xditu has sufi oiy d l o p h vioal ld of avi d i alulu. Sv ad pali alays t to gt o bak tha thy stak, hil th soso gt his satistio ithout ay ad vu." Thi applis o sts as uh as to doatios. ht Nitzsh alls th io of boig is sstially th io of xpditu ad eo ipso th io of ih t, sought th ak of th poibility to xpd. Th lap io oiy api houh ai th popiy of olf ad oth, si this is th ssay pis of oiy. If h i lap [ Uspung] io oy, h d h hll op oiy k o old oiy. Pat of Nitzsh's ida of th at of givig is that th ivif h aot ai oald, hih is a pioi ipossibl a authoaot pst hislf i a ls pftio, si h ould thby li his ay out of th old ad oiu iply
to ol the reever, whh tatamout to a humlato. ather, whe eouragg the reever to aept the doato, he hould alo dloe h rmte ad doyrae, however wthout deyg the level of the g. Oly th yeld the mater-art of kde." A lttle vaty, a lttle turg the art rle mut ome to play. Itegral elf-armato eompae the everyday thg that the regme of metaphyal mology had talked dow, ad tad grattude to them r the g of beg able to gve. I th exere, Netzhe, the elghteer, a abde by the 1 9th-etury utom of explag author o the ba of ther mleu. If the author mmortal, h t wll alo be. If Zarathutra emerge wth h laguage of elf- ad world-armato, th la guage mut ovey the preure of provoato throuh t radally elf-eulogt ad wato" rm. The mpat of Netzhe' ayg ad arrow, whh take the rm of pure dtate, beome r ealy provoked reader a therapeut ult eltg a mmue reato. Th orre pod to a vaato proedure at the moral level. Ayoe who ha beome a poor ome other way wll perhap kow that t poble to beome oe wthout Netzhe Thoe who are ot yet poor, however, a experee how he fet them wth the memory of the poblty o
Total Spsring 61
ia mm a ci ca l t, t te extet e ey e t ete t th ol pe of o. ht the o eeve puue othe dlg , o oth lvl, tly lo ptly . Euptg om the motve of vtuou gvg" pg of plulm ledg beyod ll xpt to of ut. he tue of povtve geety uh tht t ule to b loe d wt ve l to b o. h poo goty uh m ga du, whch o y ompto. It wuld de telf to hv led wee t to be d t hd obted moopoly. o b t would lk to b, t mut pot ompo. It would pf to ly tlf ope to jto, th t would to ubodt mtto. h gou, th, td oppoto to the good, who Netzhe ghtly lled decadents, e thy w hv kw the Genealo puu th dem of mooplzg meely good etmet. Fo thm, bd ythg tht expt tht they po h good whl ayhg whh belbo the oeu wth quet d ext th l of blml tk thm a mmdtly devlh. I Netzh, dd pt th ptome of odto whh tmt gutd t wll lwy ht upo t dl l guge tuto. he lto bag wt o
62
Nsh Aps
deadee ae thoe whh the ye-ma [Mucker] hae"to put t Netzhe' wod. If the ood ae o ood, t oly ute de mieux. The deadee deal hold powe oly o lo a, ad beaue, t ha ot had ay ompet to." That why f oe wat to oppoe the bette to the ood queto of opel, oe mut eolve to out to ve.
4
OF SUNS AND HUMANS
If, ody, one hunded ye e Nezhe' deh, we look bk h uho uho nd non-uho nd gp h ple n h me, we beome we h Nezhe ll h lm o ognly nd depe h pde beng he n eenl hngw n mny epe ully only pvleged medum he exeuon of endene h n one wy o nothe ould ve ged hed whou hm. H hevemen on n knowng how o nm n den of he nme Fedh Nezhe no n even, povded h we undend by even he poen on of he denl no he denl. Deny mgh o be poken of n he e whee degne lhe ono h omehng h gong o hppen n ny even, mpellng he, nd mpng h nme on . In h ene Nezhe
65
i l ener. e ren w e eoe n ve r to w te ndvdult wve whh ne te Indutrl Revoluton nd t ulturl proje ton n ront d proeeded nexorbly throuh odern vl oty nd h not eed don o. Indvdul then to b undrtood not n dentl or vodle urrent n the tory of entlte ut rter n ntropo lol rek whh rt de poble the eer g o typ o hn bn urroundd by enouh ed nd en of dhre to be ble to ndvdulze ounter to t oetl preond ton." In ndvdul rtultd the thrd pot-htorl nulton o hun bn" er the rt prehtorl n nture led to t enpton o nture nd th ond h torl one led to the ren of n over n." Indvdul ontntly rge hngng llne wth ll tht h de up the odern worl wt prore nd reton wth le-wn nd rt-wn poltl pror wt ntonl nd trnntonl otve wth ulnt e nt nd nntlt projet wth tehnophle nd tenopoe entent wth et nd edo nt orlte wth vnt-rdt nd onervtve onepton of rt wt nlytl nd trt thrp th port d o-p ltl
wth pemne edne nd el of pe mne, wth belef n ue well unbelef n t, wth tll Chtn well no-longe Chtn m of l, wth eumenl openng nd lol long, wth humnt nd pot humnt eth, wth the ego neal ble to omp ll m epeentton, well wth the dolved elf, whh ext onl the hll of mo of t mk Indvdulm pble of lline wth ll de, nd Netzhe t degne, t pophet Netzhe' petenton to be n tt nd muh moe thn n tt gounded n h dal, moden onept of ue hm, t tke not onl to thow podut on tod' mket, but nted to ete the mket wve telf, b whh the wok beltedl ed to ue In th w he ntted the ttee of the vnt-gde, whh Bo Go h debed n h led l wok on The Total Art of Stalinism If one wnt to be mket lede, one mut t opete mket mke And to be uel m ket mke, one mut ntpte nd endoe wht mn wll hooe on the ln th e llowed to wnt Netzhe had undetood tht the phenome non tht would emege etbl n tomoow' ultue w the need to dtnguh oneelf om the m It w mmedtel peent to hm tht
s
ic ld b mad, ou e un n nvu' en o be ee nd ohe hn he e, nd heeby peey bee hn ll h Th hee of he 0h nuy lf-nly, n he ye well h pyholol ene Only elf-efeenl ye e uolol nd elf-eulo ye Th uho Nzh ll h h knowlde n dvne ove onempoy heoy On h unde ndn, o he nuon, he aed, n h liim, cndiion h ld pohu ou ue he nbed h ne n he l of l, whh houhou ulue e hnded down efeene pon of appovl nd que Th wh he debed h llled need moly n ddon, hv, houh h dou of h np nd nmdai, h bove ll pod h nme a band n uel ml podu, ly lfeyle-du o n eleved wy-of-l Th he Nzchan dn f ndvdualm W p! We who lve dneouly! hen he uho den e helf uho, he elf-eulo elody ppe when he ke-ke lunhe he bnd, he dveeen ppe Nzhe lbe ed oden lnue n on ulo wh publcy Only j , only poe, only opy Th nneon ln nbl u
udtad how that mot olut popot of hgh ultu ould hav yldd t o ma ultu. It udabl that Ntzh' od u h duto a bad o a tho ad atttud th ld of dvdualm by o ttut h gatt tad alo ota h mo dtat tu poblt. Idd t p ly bau th Ntzh lf-tyl-bad mo mo tha th am of o f th autho autho tll adat a almot tbl attato that ov th ou of th lat thd of th 0 0 th tuy tuy wth th ot of th ovtly dvdualt ojutu of th pot-May '8 pod t ould ov om th uo of fat dato ad th op. Doubtl th autho Ntzh v gv th th d tat of dtg wa uaptabl to atoal-oalt olltvm ad that th bad Ntzh alo alo ad dd d d oly a ad pa tula aptuggtd tlf poduto atoal pop p op ultu. To udtad th pot po t w hav to to th t that prcedural, m m othg ot hg oth tha tha th u uo o of pop po p ad kth-podu to polt. A Clmt Gbg alady howd 1939ootg th tal akth th wold laguag of tumphat ma ultu. It dpd o th mhazd m hazd gy gy of o f u. Pop Pop ad kth a ultually ultually a poltally pol tally hot hot-ut -ut podu po du to gt
un a Hmn 69
o aa a o ma Wi i onen eeve w opyn ue n, w ope of he uel n hnd, wh uphn one n. Hle' ue ey pop n k k poln on on e e n n pop-nonli pop- nonli wh n even-l, he ple wy o hve he n of the me eevee. In on o, dophone quon ehnque n open- ue ue plye e key ole. ouh ouh e, te populton pop ulton lene hll a ol ad a i ad to lite lite to the bble oun voe of pojee po jee elf. elf. In th ene, ene , ll n ee of eon. I i deueo o e , ne no onl f evive n be nueony, i i peely by w of n inueton o o, whh lw know wh hey u u, how, n o wh end. Fo he energetic pe, he event ulue of eenen denton, nenll, whh whh ende inellible inell ible the hokn onvetbilit of lewn et nto ihtn one, nd vie ve. ve. So lon lo n publin publ ine e nto n ton n dieo' ee of eenen, e bly o pe ex n o eue he publ m" peuppoe. Bn Neze oul ply ole n he en dven dive dive of o f he NS-Mov N S-Movement ement no n o he he on on ome h h b b ee eet, t, mplbly nvu n vn-
the ae ad etaed ol the st lmbe" att tudes alog wth a matal deo of the dtum. Htle's lque edted Netzshe wth sssos ad pasted hm to a olletvst gospelshotl bee moeove Netzshes sste had emploed he sssos to pepae a ead-made of bad Netzs Ne tzshe. he. To the th e shame of o f G ema aadem aade m ph ph losoph ae 1933, oe s ed to emak that t dd exatl exatl the same sa me thg o o ts level as dd the at-Netzsheas who ae stll toda uable to do moe tha meel omple the self-pasted mato lesbut how must oe eah bak to d uvest phlosophes who do ot phloso phl osophze phze wth ssso s ssos? s? The Nato Natoaal Soal S oalst stss esolute edtos edto s of eve evet thg hg that guaateed soal s oal ad atoal suess wee able to eta less of Netzshe tha Jeeso Jeeso ould of Jesusmost Jesusmost of hs wtgs wtgs wee too to o appopate appop ate the ktsh sstem too at-atoalst too at-Gema too at-phlste too at-evahst too at-olle tvst tvst too at-mltast too t oo at-atatoast at-atatoast too dsdal of o f eve eve oep o eptt of atoal selte se lteest" est" V Vker-S ker-Sebst ebstssucht , ad all to meto the desve bae too ompatble wth a polts of esetmet egadless of whethe ths pesets tself as atoalst o o soalst so alst o as a mult-pupose m of vegeae vegeae p olts olts atoal/soalst atoal/so alst.. That thee s o path leadg om Netzshe to the
German's posing as masters must be obvious to oe o' oe o o oo ve Neze' e, ee ey ve gdued o o, ve e empo o o feel good f ey ao belle oebu a ele Neze' mol plo opl oeuve f o le exee oveom e eed o dpe oe ol pol e o e pe popey o umle eeo bou o pe cus than Nietzsche, ad o a able o e oolam o Wlelm Neze, o be ue, a-el, bu o ode o mke ommo ue evege-uy popul, em mol ploope, oe deee o loe pe, vdly oue o e e do of e ye Iead, ode o ded e eedom of eleeme g e oumedom of e l me Fom oe pe peve oly oeo o be mde o oe o dpge Neze d emp o uad uee I oe Neze, e dee of bd of dey," obled o k melf ee podu ould o ve bee edoed bee op poeo ee e bd ould eve ve bee lloed o ppe ex o e uol me Could e o ve ko om e - e epelled,
2
hs most tacous ct coud mrg? Proof that ths qustos dd ot scap Ntzsch's cosdrato ca b sthat s apart om Zarathustrs prophtc saygs mor or ss crt ca of th Church about th parasts of th ob sou crta ttrs ad work ots whch h podrd drad of th mostrousss of hs sghts whthr to abdcat om hs authorshp Howvr v f h had do ths t woud hav b mpratv to dscos why h gav up bg a authorad th rsut woud hav b ary th sam Prhaps Ntzsch kw th aswr to such objctos advac as h dd r ary vrythg s I am ot o my guard r dcvrs I have to b wthout cautomy t wats t so" I ordr to gaug what was uqu Ntzsch's rat succss as dvduasm's trd dsgr a comparso wit altrativ sigs suggsts ts Thr ar oy a w strog vrsos of hs poch-makg xprsso bcom what you ar" ad th corrspodg do what you w" Utmaty th work of o sg author ca srv as a rva projct ad to Ntzsch's ow o who th author of The Gay Science hmsf c dtay amd a gorous grat atur" ot wthout addg that to dat th most gous phosophca wrtr of h 1 9th ctury had b
/ 73
Amrc m Rh Wdo Emrso. If tz' g o atg vu aty s pstd ud th tt F spts" Emrso brgs hs poduct o th mkt ud th bad am o-cormsm." It s to ths that th gatst of Emso's ay ssays a dvotd; th bao wth whom Ama phoso h dd to t t atohd wtss th poof of ts xtc. Not otay ths was ud th hadg SeReliance, a pos pc of br thrt gs comparab ts a-ystm dsty th daato of dpd of th Ama ssay ad th voato of Amca svtud to th Euopa cao ad to vry cao ga. What taks shap hm s a at-humty pogam whh ov th ou of th xt o hudd d fty yas woud tsf s th spcc tmbr of Amca dom a oo that domatd ut th '70s of ast ctury b US cadma ddcatd tsf to th mpot of Europa maso-thos. But th yar of 1841, th udto of critical theo ws st ways o T blv blv a a pva a all ma . Spak la cvc ad all b val ;
he nmos n de me beomes he omos nd or rs hoh s rendered bk o s b he rmpes of he Ls Jdmen ( ) Gre orks of r hve no more en lesson r s hn hs The eh s o bde b or sponneos mpresson h ood-hmored nexbl hn mos hen he hole r of voes s on he oher sde Else omorro srner ll s ( ) presel h e hve hoh nd fel ll he me nd e shll be red o ke h shme or on opnon om noher ( ) b God ll no hve hs ork mde mnfes b ords ( ) Trs hself: ever her vbres o h ron srn Soe everhere s n onspr ns he mnhood of ever one of s members Soe s jon-sok ompn n hh he members ree r he beer sern of hs bred o eh shreolder o srrender he lber nd lre of he eer The vre n mos reqes s onrm Self-relne s s verson loves no reles nd reors b nmes nd soms hoso old be mn ms be nonon rms He ho old her mmorl plms ms no be hndered b he nme of oodness b ms explore f be oodness ohn s
last sacred but the integrity of your own mind. Aov o o orf, n o ve e rae of the world Yor ooness mus have om ed o it l i i none. Th ocrin of hared mu be preached as the ounteraction of he doctrine of loe when that pules and whines. ( . . .) I would ri on h linl of h door-po, Whm ( . . . ) w nno pn in xpnion. Leave or hor, s Joseph hi oa in he hand of the harlot and ee To be reat i o be misunderstood. ( . . .) Yor onrmi xplain nohin. ct inly, n wha ou have alreay don sinly will justi ou now. The centuries are conspirators aainst the sni nd thori of e ol. . .hior i an imperinn an n injr, if i be n in more than a cheerl apoloe or parable of my being and becoming . "To the perseverin mortal, said Zoroaer, "e blessed Immorl are swi.5
Emrso posssss a tmpora advac ovr Ntzsch addto to a o Sc wh Emrso's o-cormsm sms as f t wr mad to ud agast a crta rsstac toward a ambvat arcsssm of th mass o
ti baac by mocracy at th of th ay Nitzch pirit bra ra a ratr rik of bi imitat by a ucc-hury movmt of or. Facm pat a tur ar poiticay othg othr tha nsurrecons of enercharged osers, who r a tim of xcptio cha th ru i orr to appar a victor. Th Nitzch brad wa rcuprat by or ad or-ractor bcau it promi to b th brad of wr. A thi horric pio i ot a cou ot at Emro projct wo out ovr Nitzch o th bra ot. That why mot of u toay ar o cormit ot pirit. Our avra thouht a ig ar a made n the USA ot ma n S i-Maa. Th iicac of thi irc ca b by rturi aai to Nitzch th author. h th uhorc roductos o th rt part of Zaratha, h urtook th mot raca hort circuit btw f-prai icour a vagica icour h cocpt of Dioyia" ha cari accorig to th author bcom th hight ct." I th coor pio of wrti Nitzch a vr br or ar am a gua u by producig a dicour that wa a pur f-advrt o crativ ctay. Ev o h wa ot xacty corrct xcuvy rrvig th pri cat Doyia" r hi hiht ." What
f Sus ad Hmas I 77
a o igh i h prioruptio rathr wr mor Aooa rradatos whch Doysa agmtatos appard to hav b ovrcom It s ot by chac that th gosp accordg to Zarathustra th suth star of Aoopays th ro of th xmpary Bg ad t fas to th w roht to rct hmsf iitaio of h u hat I touch bcoms ght"oy sus ca tak ths wa about thm svs Ths as abov to thr most mportat gstur a tatsth radss to ovrxd thmsvs ucodtoay ad th abty to st wthout rgrt I both rspcts th tachgs of th at Ntzsch pot to a imitation oli. Th su ao s hroc rght to th momt of sttg ad rmas grous ut t gos dow Hrosm s th good w to absout sfdms" th author had oc wrtt r hs youg Rusa grd Oy sus ca b so progat that thy ca b acd udr th guardashp of ratoa hrs wh th coomc das of th attr maag to prva Oy th su has a gvg vrtu as rst atur; oy sus car othg r th sym mtry bt gvg d takg; oy sus sh sovrgy ovr propots ad oots; ad oy sus rad o crtqus O ths ast pot th author Ntzsch dd ot totay succd hs bcomgsu Morovr thr ar aso som othr
78
Nsh Aps
respects that gve ground r suspn that Netzsche's sun partcpates r more n humanty begns wth than the metaphor betrays Zarathustra's rst address to t: You great star! What woud your happness be f you had not those r whom you shne? ( ) we took your overow om you and bessed you r t"6 And t cumnates n Zarathustras prayer to hs w: Tha ma one da be read and ripe in he g rea noon; read r mself and r m mo s hidden will; a bow burning r is arrow, an arrow burnin g r is sar a sar read and ripe in is noon, glowing, skewered, blissl wih annihilaing arows of he sun a sun iself and an inexorable wil of he sun .
.
.
One sees n these phrases that the author sympa thzes nether wth phlosophca haucnatons whch procam the ght nto dentty n the name of the subject" nor wth the phosophy of da ogue n whch subjects address each other ce to ce or accuse each other of turnng away om daogue Netzsche's nterests are drected at a theory of the penetrated penetraton an ethcs of
overowing into an entering into others a l ogic of pn n ne-n. e e no know of symmetrca dscussions negotiaton of the middle-value beteen banaities but instead of inter-soar reatons he trac of rays om start to star the penetration om viscera t vscera being pregnant and making-pregnant. In the belly of the whale I become the herald of li." His nerest es n n pnn bu n emnon. On an neec tual leve he s a radica bisexua a star whch fevers to be enetrate an a un which penetrates and prevais." I am penetrated therere I am; I radiate n you therere you are. By sexuazng the sun he reveses he drecon f mon and cmpes the sun to become the imtator of people provided that the indvdual is an authorthat is one who is penetrated by anguage by music a voice which eeks ear and cees them. From hs pont t s possble t gve yet another tst to the interpretton of Nietzsche's work om wthin the critique oflanguage. If Nietzsche's evangelical operaton lberate self-prase then a tnmed gh n he ef of hs pae. In noting that Nietzsche's poetics aboshes the rules of indrect eulogy and substitutes praise of the reigner wth selpraise we see only the outer ayer f the turmo created. On a deeper eve Netzsche's afrmative anguage remains obged to
0
I
prais th rigrbttr it praiss th o-sl such as it has vr b clbratd br. ovr it dvots itsl to a rigss that is mor tha th othrss o aothr prso. It xposs itsl to a rigss that travrss th spakr as it ould a rvrbrat corridor a rig ss that ptrats him ad maks him possibl it is xposd to th rigr's cultur laguag ducators illsss cotamiatios tmptatios ids idd v th sl hich placs par thss it ostsibly os aroud phoma. It clbrats i itsl a llss o rigss calld th orld. Whatvr Nitzsch allgs about ths magituds is trasrmd ito prais o th rigr i itsl s my thr I am alrady dad ad as my mothr I am still aliv..."9 Thus Nitzsch's slssss must b sought bath th lvl o appart sl-praisi his opig to th ir rigss i his xcssiv miality i his idulgt curiosity r vrythig ad i his vr totally compsatd imbcility. This is hy th author is o simpl su but a rsoac-body. As my mothr I still spak as my tur ids I am still to b hard. Nitzsch could b dscribd as th discovrr o htro-arcissism: hat h ulti matly arms i himsl ar th othrsss hich gathr i him ad mak him up lik a composi tio hich ptrat him dlight him tortur
81
him and surprise him. Without surprise lie would e . ee mu e meng n e e hn ue. me e ue une h f he i p" i h peue mpiin qu he f pu piing. Th h f h du n h he unin mp hing h que f eug en ee e n jen n vemng. Php ugh pmi uev mk n u f Gmn ngug n Eupn n Nezh eh h pinne. In hi umnin hinkeing h ud himef b n gnn f h univ ing f min in individu. A phph he u hv ejed h e me e kee f he f n k n pube hme Bu e kn h h exp nd did hi hm uing hi uhi nm bnd. Th did hi he unbnn h uh h en me he pn n h eeh hh he g m h uppe ndmn her nd if u h i n i nd h n pe. W n n idim. Thee n muipii f ph gu nd h beng mpd un h n f n g hih g frmd nd nmd.
O thi prci poit th author cotradict hi ow brad ad hi tatmt o thi ar xplicit. Prhap w ca do o bttr th o th hu drdth aivrary of hi dath tha to rpat th tatmt i th hop that o tur rdac tio ca xci thm The whole surce of consciousnessconscious ness is a surcehas o be kep ee om all of he grea imperaives. Be carel even of grea words, grea aiudes . . . . I have no memory of ever having made an eoryou will no deec any race of sruggle in my life, I am he opposie of a heroic naure. To "will anyhing, o "srive aer ayhing, o have a "goal, a "wish in mind I have never experienced his. Ri gh now I am sill looking ou over my urean immnse ure!as i i were a calm sea: ere is no a ripple of longing . I do no have he sli ghes wish r anyhing o be dieren om how i is; I do no wan o become anyhin g oher han wha I am. Bu his is how my life has always been.10
Thi idyll o f th author rpod oc agai to th Zarathutra idyll of noon, th rcumbt ovatio o th prct arth. Hr th arth m to awr i advac to th qutio of whom it tak itlf r.
ike such a weary shi in he silles bay hus s s , us, wn bud o wh h lies heads Oh happiness, oh happness! Do you wan o sin g oh sece my soul? You lie i he rass Bu hs s solemn hour no shepherd plays his ue Sd back! H nn slps on he meados D sg! Sll! T ld s p 1 1
ere the authr himelf i alled upn t tp bein an authr Where the wrld ha beme everythin that may nt be awakened the writer i n mre. Let' leave him in hi ld nn. We mut piture the authr wh eae a happy pern.
OES
Introduction
1 Friedrich Nietzsche,
The Anti-Christ, Ecce Homo, Twilight ofthe Idols, and Other Writings edited by Aaron Ridley and Judith Norman, translated by Judith Norman, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, No. 16, p. 13 [translation
2
Friedrich Nietzsche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra "The Conva lescent, edited by Adrian Del Caro Robert B. Pippin, translated by Adrian Del Caro, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006, p. 173
Gospels-Reaons
1
Otied von Weissenburg, Evangelienbuch (extracts), ed., translated into modern German and commented by Gisela Volmann-Profe, Stuttgart 1987, p. 37
2 Translator's note: in German "iern, to celebrate, can also mean "to take holidays. Cf. Wittgenstein's phrase die Spracheiert"
3 Transator's note: oldest known rm of the word deutsch (i.e., German).
4 Dedication to Luitbert, Archbishop of Mainz, op. cit pp. 19-21 5 The Jeerson Bible with an introduction by Forrester Church and an aerword by Jaroslav Pelikan, Boston: Beacon Press, 1989, p. 17
85
6 Ibid p 28 e Gose ccording to otoy translate an eite y Davi Patterson, London an Tuscaloosa,
1992
8 Ibid p 30 The Fh
1 Friedrich Nietzsche, Smiche Bri Kritischen Stuienausgae, Vol 6, Munich, 1986, p 327 . bid., 363
3 Ibid p 380 4 Selected Leters of
Nietche eite an translate y
hristopher Midleton, Hackett Pulishing ompany, nc Indianapolis/amridge 1996, p 223 German original, p 497)
5 The Anti-Christ and Other Writings, op. cit The Antichrist, 45, p 42 6 Selected Letters, op cit p 223 German edition, p 497) 7 e Anti-Christ and Other Wrings op cit p 137 Tot Sponsorng 1 ce Homo amrige, p 105 2 Ibid pp 126-7 3 Ibid p 72 4 Ibid pp 129-30 5 Ibid p 143 6 Ibid p 98 7 Ibid p 144 8 "Ecce Homo in Basic Writings of Nietzsche eite, with ommentaries y Walter Modern Lirary, 1968, p 677
86 !
<!
translate and New York: The
9 Ibid p 13 1 Ibid p 82 11 Thus Spoke Zarathustra op cit I p 218 12 ce Homo Cambridge, p 136 Of Sun nd Humn 1 On the concept of "insulation
as anthropological
nism, see Dieter Classens, Das Konkrete und das Abstrakte Soziologische Skizzen zur Anthropologie Frankrt: Suhrkamp, 198, pp 6-92
2 The Antichrist op cit p 3 3 Thus Spoke Zarathustra op cit II I, Of Ol d an d New Tablets 19, p 167 4 Thus Spoke Zarathustra op. cit I The Magician, 2 p 27 5 Ralph Waldo Emerson, Essas, Vol One "Self-Reliance, accessed online at rweo rg/ complete/ complete-works/ii essays-i/ii-self-reliancehtml
6 Thus Spoke Zarathustra p 3 7 Ibid p 173 8 Nachgesene Schren ritische Studienausgabe, Vol, 1, p 428 Homo p 74 9 1 Ibid p 97 1 1 Thus Spoke Zarathustra p 224
! B
