The Birth of "The Birth of Tragedy"

Author(s): Dennis Sweet

Source: Journal of the History of Ideas, Vol. 60, No. 2 (Apr., 1999), pp. 345-359
Published by: University of Pennsylvania Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3653859 .
Accessed: 10/06/2014 03:55

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

University of Pennsylvania Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
Journal of the History of Ideas.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 91.229.248.22 on Tue, 10 Jun 2014 03:55:54 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 The Birth of The Birth of Tragedy

Dennis Sweet

Introduction

Nietzsche's firstbook, TheBirthof Tragedy,is ostensibly an accountof the

psychological motives behindthe creationand modificationsof Greekdrama,
but it is really much morethanthis. It is the author'sfirst attemptto understand
the dynamic processes of humancreativity in general-a concern that would
occupy him throughouthis career.When we look at his own estimationof the
value of his firstbook, however,we see thathe maintainedsomethingof a love-
hate relationshipto it. In the second edition, published in 1886, Nietzsche in-
cluded a prefatory"Attemptat a Self-Criticism,"in which he castigates the
style of his first literaryeffort:

[T]oday I find it an impossible book: I consider it badly written,pon-

derous, embarrassing,image-mad and image-confused, sentimental,
in places saccharineto the point of effeminacy,uneven in tempo,with-
out the will to logical cleanliness ... disdainful of proof, mistrustful
even of the "propriety"of proof... an arrogantand rhapsodicbook....'

Yet Nietzsche was convinced that the book, despite its stylistic flaws, did in-
deed have its merits.In Ecce Homo he evaluatedthe positive value of TheBirth
of Tragedyin the following way:

The two decisive innovationsof the book are, first, its understanding
of the Dionysian phenomenonamong the Greeks: for the first time, a
psychological analysis of this phenomenonis offered, and it is consid-
eredas one root of the whole of Greekart.Secondly,thereis the under-
standingof Socratism;Socrates is recognized for the first time as an
instrumentof Greek disintegration,as a typical decadent. "Rational-

FriedrichNietzsche, The Birth of Tragedy,tr. W. Kaufmann(New York, 1967), 19.

345
of theHistoryof Ideas,Inc.
1999byJournal
Copyright

This content downloaded from 91.229.248.22 on Tue, 10 Jun 2014 03:55:54 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
346 Dennis Sweet

ity" against instinct. "Rationality"at any price as a dangerousforce

thatundermineslife.2

Since its appearancein 1872 TheBirth of Tragedyhas been the object of

bothintenselynegativeandstronglypositive assessmentsamongclassicalschol-
ars. Eitherit is dismissed out of handas a piece of unscholarlyromanticism,or
it is praisedas a unique contributionto the study of Greek art and life, a book
of seminal importance for modem classical scholarship.3Among those who
judge the book to be valuableand original,most follow the authorin regarding
the "two decisive innovations"spoken of in the above quotationas the heartof
the book's value andoriginality.Yet few of Nietzsche's advocateshave gone on
to show clearly how or in what sense these innovative insights are innovative
and insightful.
To understandthe significanceandto appreciatethe originalityof TheBirth
of Tragedyit is importantto see it againstthe backgroundof some of the estab-
lished theoriesof artand tragedywhich precededit. I shall begin, therefore,by
characterizing,in broad strokes, two such theories that emerged in the eigh-
teenthcentury;then I shall consider how the theory of tragedythatNietzsche
offers in his first book grew out of his dissatisfactionwith these earlierviews.
FinallyI shall show how the "two decisive innovations"expressedin TheBirth
of Tragedydeveloped duringthe years precedingthe book's publication.

2
FriedrichNietzsche, Ecce Homo, tr. W. Kaufmann(New York, 1969), 271.
3 The first view was
originally expressed, with a great deal of rancor and hyperbole, by
Ulrich von Wilamowitz-Mollendorffin a pamphlet,also publishedin 1872, Zukunftsphilologie!
Eine Erwiderungauf Friedrich Neitzsches "Geburtder Tragddie" [Philology of the Future!A
Reply to Friedrich Nietzsche s "TheBirth of Tragedy"].The second, more positive evaluation
of the book began when Erwin Rohde championed Nietzsche's views against Wilamowitz-
Mollendorffs attack in an article published the same year, Afterphilologie:Zur Beleuchtung
des von dem Dr. phil. Ulrich von Wilamowitz-Mollendorffherausgegebenen Pamphlets:
"Zukunftsphilologie!"[Pseudo-philology: Towardthe Elucidation of the Pamphletpublished
by Ulrich von Wilamowitz-Mollendorff, Ph.D.: "Philology of the Future!"].
More recently we find the negative appraisalof Nietzsche's first book endorsedby Konrat
Ziegler (Real-Encyclopadie der klassischen Altertumswissenschaft,VIA, 2075), who holds
that "the criticism of the young Wilamowitz remains essentially correct." On the positive
side, WernerJaeger (Paideia: The Ideals of Greek Culture[3 vols.; New York, 1945], I, 265)
has described The Birth of Tragedyas "brilliant";Bruno Snell (The Discovery of the Mind, tr.
T. G. Rosenmeyer [New York, 1960], 121) has suggested that, with Nietzsche's distinction
between the Dionysian and Apollinian impulses, "we perceive a fine sympathy with the el-
emental power of inchoate tragedy";F. M. Cornford,From Religion to Philosophy (London,
1912), 111,regardedthe book as "a work of profoundimaginativeinsight, which left the schol-
arship of a generation toiling in the rear";G. F. Else, The Origin and Early Form of Greek
Tragedy(Cambridge, 1965), 10, called it "a great book, by whatever standardone cares to
measureit";and Hugh Lloyd-Jones,Studies in Nietzsche and the Classical Tradition,ed. J. C.
O'Flahertyet al. (Chapel Hill, 1976), 9, judged the book to be "a work of genius [that]began a
new era in the understandingof Greek thought."

This content downloaded from 91.229.248.22 on Tue, 10 Jun 2014 03:55:54 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
TheBirthof Tragedy 347

TheTheoretical
Background

Duringthemiddledecadesof theeighteenthcenturythereemergeda keen

interestin providinga theoreticalaccountof thebeautyexpressedin theworks
of classicalGreekartin generalandin the literaryachievementsof theAttic
tragediansin particular.AmongGermanwritersthe personmost responsible
for bringing about this interest was the art historian, JohannJoachim
Winckelmann. According toWinckelmann, thedominant of beauty
characteristics
foundin ancientGreekworksof artareexpressedin termsof their"noblesim-
plicity andquiet grandeur[edle Einfalt undstille Gr6sse]."4The ideal qualities
of harmonyandcomposurecharacteristic of classicalGreeksculpturereflect
andembodythesereneandhappyworld-viewof theGreekartistsandof classi-
cal Greekculturein general.Thetwobestexamplesof thischaracter arefound
in thefamous"ApolloBelvedere"statueandin theequallywell-knownstatue
depictingtheTrojanpriestLaocoonandhis sons'beingdevouredby twinser-
pents-an exampleof "classical" artthatwouldbe utilizedby manysubsequent
theorists(despitethe factthatthe statuewas probablycreatedaroundthe first
centuryAD).
In assessingthe LaocoonfigureWinckelmann
writes,

Justas thedepthsof theseaalwaysremaincalmwhilethesurfacemay

rage,so too doestheexpressionin Greekfiguresrevealgreatnessand
composureof the soul in all passions.This spiritis portrayedin the
face of Laocoon,andnot in the face alone,despitethe most intense
sufferings.The pain ... does not express itself with any violence, either
in the face or in thepostureas a whole.He raisesno dreadfulcrylike
the Laocoonin Vergil'spoem....Laocoonsuffers,buthe sufferslike
Sophocles'Philoctetes; hisanguishpiercesus tothesoul,yetwe should
wish to be ableto bearanguishas thisgreatmandoes.5

Thereferenceshereto SophoclesandVirgilleadto someimportant ques-

tionsthatwill setthecourseforlatertheoriesof Greekart,includingNietzsche's.
If ouraestheticjudgmentsof beautyin classicalartdependessentiallyuponthe
objects'embodyingthis dominantGreekattitudeof serenityandcomposure,
howthenarewe to accommodate certainobviousexceptions?Wheredoesclas-
sical Greekliteraturefit into the picture?How, for example,do the ghastly
bloodlettings, therelishingof gorydescriptionsof murder,andthefitsof unre-
strainedviolencethatwe findinAeschylus'sOresteiareflecttheuniversalse-

4 J. J. Winckelmann,Gedankeniiberdie Nachahmungdergriechischen Werkein derMalerei

undBildhauerkunst are my own unlessotherwise
(Stuttgart,1755),26, 29. All translations
indicated.
5 Ibid., 24-25.

This content downloaded from 91.229.248.22 on Tue, 10 Jun 2014 03:55:54 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
348 Dennis Sweet

renityandcomposureof the classical Greekmind?Accordingto Winckelmann,

these more sinister featuresof Greek art are merely preliminaryaberrationsor
immatureexpressions of the classical ideal which, in literature,finds its ulti-
mate and perfect expression in the "noble simplicity and quiet grandeur"of
Plato's dialogues.6
Winckelmann'saccount here representsthe first attemptto provide what
we might call a motivationaltheoryof Greekart;that is, a theorynotjust about
the works of art themselves but about what motivated the artists to produce
them and what motivates the spectatorsto enjoy them. More than this, how-
ever, it was intended to have the practical function of providing the modem
artist with an ideal standardof beauty-a standardby which the quality of
modem works of art could and should be judged.
Despite theirblatantad hoc appeal,Winckelmann'sideas exerteda tremen-
dous influence on the developmentof othermotivationalaccountsof Greekart.
One such account, which would prove to be of particular importance for
Nietzsche's views on tragedy,was offered by GottholdEphraimLessing in his
book, Laocoon (1766). Lessing begins by pointing out a fundamentalweak-
ness in Winckelmann'sproposaland then proceeds to develop his own reme-
dial theory.Winckelmannhad arguedthat all Greek artistic creationsexpress
the same characteristicsof "noble simplicity and quiet grandeur,"characteris-
tics that express the essence of the classical Greek world-view. The paradig-
matic expression of these characteristicsis found in the statue of the dying
Laoco6n; the statue of a man who, despite his terrorin the recognitionof his
impending death, wears an expression of quiet resolve and nobility. Yet as
Winckelmannhimself admits, such quiet resolve and nobility are not charac-
teristics of all Greek art. Greek literatureabounds with vivid descriptionsof
unrestrainedviolence andheart-rendingpain. Lessing points out thatin Homer,
for example,

wounded warriorsnot infrequentlyfall to the groundwith a cry. At a

mere scratchVenus shrieks aloud ... because suffering naturemust be
given herdue. Even brazenMars,when he feels the lance of Diomedes,
shrieks so horriblythat it sounds like the cries of ten thousandraging
warriorsand fills both armies with terror.7

Greek tragedy is likewise filled with cries of despair,shrieks of madness,

and violent expressions of pain and remorse.Winckelmannwas satisfied with
relegatingthese expressionsto a lower,moreprimitivelevel of artisticdevelop-
ment that reaches its pinnacle in Plato's dialogues. Thus he attemptedto sub-

6
Ibid., 26-27.
7 G. E. Lessing, Laoco6n, ed. H. Bliimner (Berlin, 1880), 151-52.

This content downloaded from 91.229.248.22 on Tue, 10 Jun 2014 03:55:54 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
The Birthof Tragedy 349

sume literaryworks of artunderthe same principlethatdeterminesthe quality

of beauty in the domain of painting and sculpture.For Winckelmannthe art
historian,the visual artswere the paradigmsof beauty.They expressthe nobil-
ity and serenityof the Greekspiritfar more directlyand effectively thando the
works of Greekliterature.
Lessing agrees with Winckelmann'sprocedureof developing a theory of
the Greekworld-view by comparingand generalizingon the basis of the clas-
sical artisticproductions.Yet he is criticalof Winckelmann'sdesireto lumpall
artisticphenomenatogether and to propose some principleunderwhich both
visual and literaryworks of artcould be subsumedandevaluated.Lessing con-
tends thatthe visual arts(e.g., paintingand sculpture)andthe literaryarts(e.g.,
epic and tragedy) are fundamentallydistinct; that is, each expresses its own
uniquequalitiesof aestheticvalue, and each is subjectto its own specific prin-
ciples withrespecttojudgmentsof beauty.Consider,forexample,Clytemnestra's
descriptionof her husband's death in the first play of Aeschylus's Oresteia
trilogy: "[A]s he died he showered me with the blood-darkand furious rain,
acerb savored,to delight me like flowers underthe divine, glorious downpour
at the birthseason of the buds."8If artisticbeautyconsists in the representation
of"noble simplicity andquiet grandeur,"then clearlythereis nothingbeautiful
here. The same is true, for example, with respect to Homer's descriptionof
Achilleus's grief at the deathof Patroklosand to Sophocles' characterizations
of the heroes' behaviorsin the Aias and the Philoctetes.
Lessing's point here is really a simple one. If these and the multitudeof
similar descriptionsand expressions found throughoutGreek literaturestrike
us as beautiful,then we must be judging them by differentstandardsthan the
standardswe apply to Greeksculpture.The same point is made from the other
directionas well. If we imagine a statue of Laocoon in light of the terrorso
beautifullyand so simply expressedin Virgil'sAeneid-a statueof a man"rais-
ing horrifyingshouts to the stars"(ii, 222)-then we fail to achieve the experi-
ence of beauty.

Justthinkof Laocoonwith his mouthforcedwide open, andjudge. Let

him scream, and see. It was a form that inspiredpity because it pos-
sessed beauty and pain at the same time; now it has become an ugly,
disgusting form from which one gladly turnsone's face, because the
sight of pain arouses disgust.....9

Herewe can discernan importantfeatureof Lessing's theory,one which he

more or less passes over but which will become extremely importantfor
Nietzsche. Inasmuchas we acknowledge that there are differentstandardsof

8Agamemnon, 1389-92.
9 G. E. Lessing, Laocodn, 162.

This content downloaded from 91.229.248.22 on Tue, 10 Jun 2014 03:55:54 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
350 Dennis Sweet

beautyamongthe differentartforms,we mayalso recognizethatthe ancient

Greekworld-viewwasmorecomplexandmoresubtlethanWinckelmann had
supposedit to be. Nietzschewill arguethatin additionto thecalmandserene
attitudeexpressedin the Greekvisualarts,therewas also a darkandsinister
side to the ancientGreekcharacterwhichfindsexpressionin theirliterature,
andmostperspicuously, in tragicdrama.Lessing,however,doesnotwantto go
this far.He insiststhatwhile thereis a differencebetweenthe standardsof
beautyin the visualandliteraryarts,bothartsreflecta basicallyrationaland
optimisticworld-view.
The followingsummaryof Lessing'stheoryof tragedyhas been culled
fromthe scattereddiscussionscontainedin Hamburgische Dramaturgie I and
11(1767-68). ' Herehe worksouttheessentiallyAristoteliancharacteristics of
tragedy in an effortto show how they had beenmisused by theFrench neoclas-
sicaldramatists (particularlyby VoltaireandCorneille)andhowtheymightbe
moreproperlyemployedin the developmentof Germantheater.
Lessingregardsthe plays of Sophocles(specifically,the Philoctetes,the
Aias,andTheWomen ofTrachis)as theparadigms of tragicdrama.LikeAristotle
beforehim,Lessingsees thepsychologicalimpactof tragedyuponthespecta-
tor as its most importantfunction.He insiststhatthe essenceof tragedyin-
volves, first,a "dischargeof emotions,"thatis, an expressionof irrational,
subjectivefeelings;buthe insiststhatthis is thenfollowedby a realizationof
"poeticjustice,"i.e., the recognitionof an objectiveandrationalprovidence.
The tragicflaw (hamartia)which bringsaboutthis realizationis not just a
tragicerrorin judgment;it is a moralflaw in the hero.Thebasicfunctionof
tragedyis, therefore,its didacticfunction-its abilityto edifytheobserverby
subordinating the morallyflawed,irrationalcharacterof the herounderthe
moralandrationalconstraints of objectiveprovidence.Insofaras a playfulfills
this functionin this way, the play may,accordingto Lessing,be judgedto
possesstragicbeauty.

TheGenesisof Nietzsche'sTheoryof Tragedy

Duringthenineteenthcenturyphilologystroveto establishitselfas a disci-

plinedistinctfromthe sortof antiquarian the ap-
criticismthatcharacterized
of
proaches Winckelmann the
andLessing.Following proceduresdeveloped
by FriedrichAugust Wolf inhis seminalbook,Prolegomena adHomerum (1795),
philologyattempted to achievethestatusof anobjectivescience,anAltertums-
wissenschaft;i.e., theinvestigation baseduponscientific
of classicalliterature

10G. E.
Lessing, Hamburgische Dramaturgie I (1767); K. Lachmann (ed.), Gotthold
Ephraim Lessings sdmtliche Schriften (Stuttgart, 1893), IX, nos. 35, 37-39, 46, 49; and
HamburgischeDramaturgieII (1767-68); ibid. (Stuttgart,1894), X, nos. 74-83, 89, 94-95.

This content downloaded from 91.229.248.22 on Tue, 10 Jun 2014 03:55:54 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
TheBirthof Tragedy 351

methodratherthanuponsubjectiveaestheticexperienceor speculativemeta-
physics.Itwaspreciselythelackof thisstandard
styleandscientificprocedure
whichNietzsche'sfirstcritic,Wilamowitz-Mollendorff,
foundso offensiveabout
TheBirth of Tragedy.
It is interestingthatmany of the criticismsexpressedby Wilamowitz-
Mollendorffwerelatervoicedby Nietzschehimself.As alreadynoted,in the
"Attemptat a Self-Criticism" includedin the secondeditionof TheBirthof
Tragedy,he calledit an"embarrassing" and"sentimental" book-in reference,
no doubt,to the book'sunbridledpraiseof RichardWagner.He also com-
plainedof the book's"image-mad andimage-confused" style andits lack of
"logical cleanliness."
Yetit is difficultto see how he couldhavewrittenthe bookin anysortof
"logicallyclean"fashion.Hadhe restrictedhimselfto the stylisticformsand
procedural dogmaof nineteenth-century philology,it is unlikelythathe would
haveachievedthe"twodecisiveinnovations" firstmadeexplicitin TheBirthof
Tragedy:the descriptionof"the Dionysianphenomenon amongtheGreeks...
as onerootof thewholeof Greekart"andthe"recognition" of Socratesas "an
instrument of Greekdisintegration."" Theseinsightswere madepossibleby
Nietzsche'scommitment to anapproachto classicalscholarship thatwasmore
comprehensive, morephilosophical,thantheapproachadvocatedby themore
conservative, scientificallyorientedphilologistswhofollowedthemethodslaid
downby Wolf.In describingSocrates'optimisticfaithin reasonas distortion
andfalsificationof themorebasic,instinctive,"aesthetictruths"whichcharac-
terize"theDionysianphenomenon," Nietzscheis clearlycriticalof the value
andusefulnessof philologyas a mereAltertumswissenschaft, as a rationaland
scientificinvestigationof antiquity.
Suchcriticismwas expressedearlyon in a publiclecturegivenin Mayof
1869 and entitled,"Homerand ClassicalPhilology."HereNietzschestrikes
outagainstthesterile,hairsplitting styleof philologyas merescientificproce-
dure.He suggeststhat"eachandeveryphilologicalactivityshouldbe encom-
passedand enclosedin a philosophicalworld-viewin whicheverythingiso-
latedandscatteredevaporatesas somethingobjectionable, andonlythewhole
andunitaryremainsstanding."12
Thisdesireto view thesubjectmatterof philologyas an integrated whole,
involvingbothreasonandaestheticfeeling,wasexpressedon a morepersonal
level in Nietzsche'scorrespondences of thisperiod.In a letterto ErwinRohde
of February1870he writesthat"science,art,andphilosophyaregrowingto-

" Ecce Homo, 271.

12
Nietzsche, "Homerund die klassische Philologie," Friedrich Nietzsche: Werkein drei
Binden, ed. K. Schlechta (3 vols.; Munich, 1956), III, 174.

This content downloaded from 91.229.248.22 on Tue, 10 Jun 2014 03:55:54 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
352 Dennis Sweet

gether in me so that in any case I shall one day give birth to Centaurs."13 In
anotherletterof the same periodNietzsche remarksto his friend,PaulDeussen,
that "I notice how my philosophical, moral, and scientific aspirationsstrive
towarda single goal, thatI-perhaps the firstof all philologists-might achieve
wholeness [Ganzheit]."'4 What,we may wonder,was Nietzschetryingto achieve
with this integratedapproachto philology? What sort of "wholeness"was he
seeking?
EarlierI called attentionto the point thatLessing had made with respectto
Winckelmann'sattemptto subsumebothvisual and literaryartsundera single,
overridingprinciple-the principlewhich says that all beautifulGreek art ex-
pressesthe same characteristicof"noble simplicityandquietgrandeur."Lessing
pointedout thata greatdeal of Greekliteratureis beautifuldespite the fact that
it is not particularlynoble, simple, or quiet. He suggested that the beauty of
epic and tragic literaturemust be judged according to different criteriathan
those we apply to sculptureand painting.
Throughhis close studyofLessing's Laocoon in 1865 Nietzsche was made
aware of this criteriologicalproblem which Lessing had diagnosed and had
attemptedto solve. Yet he was convinced thatLessing had failed to solve it. In
a letterto Rohde of 7 October1869 Nietzsche insists that"thestrongconcernis
above all to step out beyond Lessing's Laocoon; something which one may
only now declare, without inner anxiety and shame.""'This "steppingout be-
yond" Lessing meant, for Nietzsche, that one must not only evaluate Greek
literaturewith different standardsthan those of the plastic arts. One should
furtherrealize that these standardsneed not reflect the didacticrationalityand
purposefuloptimism which Lessing saw as the essence of all Greek art.
By 1869 Nietzsche was convinced that a rational optimism was indeed
representedin the classical Greekvisual artsas well as in the literaryworks of
Plato. Yet this was only one part of a larger,more complex picture. For the
Greeks also possessed a sinister, pessimistic, irrationalview of life, which,
accordingto Nietzsche,was expressedmostperspicuouslyin theworksof Homer
and in the early tragediesofAeschylus. Winckelmannhad virtuallyignoredthe
sinisterand irrationalside of Greekliteratureby relegatingit to a lower stage of
development,a developmentthat culminatesin the rationaland optimistic lit-
eratureof Plato. Lessing, on the otherhand,had acknowledgedthe terribleand
emotionalaspects of Greektragedy;but he had insistedthatthe ultimateaim of
tragedy was didactic, an aim achieved when the spectatorobserves that the
irrationaland subjective suffering of the hero is subsumedunder and recon-
ciled with a rational,providentialpurpose.

3 G. Colli et al. (eds.), Nietzsche: Briefwechsel (Berlin, 1977), II, 1, 95.

'4 Ibid., 98.
15Nietzsche: Briefwechsel, II, 1, 63.

This content downloaded from 91.229.248.22 on Tue, 10 Jun 2014 03:55:54 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
The Birth of Tragedy 353
Here then we can discernthe true originalityof Nietzsche's theoryof trag-
edy with respect to the earliermotivationaltheories. Instead of regardingthe
darkand sinister side of Greek art as an underdevelopedor aberrantaspect of
the Greekworld-view which leads to a higher,truer,more rationalandoptimis-
tic attitude, Nietzsche insists that this rational and optimistic characterwas
actuallynothing more than a relatively late and thoroughlyartificialrepresen-
tationof a more basic, instinctive,and fundamentallyaestheticview of human
existence. It is only when both of these seemingly mutuallyexclusive attitudes
arebroughttogetherthatwe can achieve a complete and "whole"pictureof the
ancientGreekworld-view.
Thus, as early as 1869-70 we find the first clear expression of one of the
most importantdoctrinesof Nietzsche's entirephilosophy-one which repre-
sents the specification of a more general view which he borrows from Scho-
penhauer.Ratherthan regardingthe rationalproceduresand commitmentsof
science (and of philology in particular)as the highest andbest means of acquir-
ing knowledge, Nietzsche insists that such methods lead to a restrictedand
unnaturalview of reality.For Nietzsche, reason is not intrinsicallyopposed to
instinct.It is merely one fairlyrecentmanifestationof humaninstinct.Further-
more, its usefulness consists not in its ability to divorce the humanbeing from
life and nature but ratherin its capacity to provide an integratedpicture of
humanreality.This is what Nietzsche seems to have had in mind when, in his
letterto Deussen, he referredto his desire to be the firstphilologist to "achieve
wholeness [Ganzheit]."Throughouthis careerhe remainedfaithfulto "thetask
which this audacious book [TheBirth of Tragedy]daredto tackle for the first
time: to look at sciencefrom theperspective of the artist, and at artfrom that of
life."'6 The task thatNietzsche is setting for himself, which is first expressedin
his writings from May of 1869 to Februaryof 1870, would remain the most
importanttask of his entire philosophical enterprise.The views of this period
representthe seeds of his principalprogram:"to translateman back into na-
ture."17

The Development of Nietzsche's Theory of Tragedy

Nietzsche's initial attempt to work out the details of his view of tragic
dramaas a naturalunity, as a "whole" composed of disparateelements, ap-
peared in two public lectures given on 18 Januaryand 1 February1870. In
these lectures we see the first clear expression of what he later calls the "two
decisive innovations"presentedin TheBirth of Tragedy.

16
Nietzsche, Ecce Homo, 19.
17
Nietzsche, Beyond Good and Evil, tr. W. Kaufmann(New York, 1966), 161.

This content downloaded from 91.229.248.22 on Tue, 10 Jun 2014 03:55:54 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
354 Dennis Sweet

Inthefirstlecture,"TheGreekMusicDrama,"Nietzschecharacterizes the
Dionysianphenomenon as it was originallyexpressedin Greektragedy.In-
steadof followingthe standard, popularview putforthby Aristotle,Winckel-
and
mann, Lessing, which regarded Sophoclean dramaasthearchetypeof Greek
tragedy,Nietzschegoes backto the earliestbeginningsof tragedyin orderto
understand its originalpurposeandappeal.

Thesoulof theAthenianwhocameto view tragedyin thegreatfestival

of Dionysosstillretainedsomethingof thatelementoutof whichtrag-
edywasborn.It is thisoverwhelming burstingforthof thestruggleof
spring,a storm and rage of mixedfeelings,whichall nativepeoples
andnatureas a wholerecognizein the approachof spring.'8

GreektragedyemergedfromtheAthenianfestivalin honorof Dionysos-

the god of organicnature,instinct,fertility,and ecstasy.Nietzschesuggests
thatthepurposeof theAthenianDionysiawas to bringthespectatorto a pecu-
liarpsychologicalstatewherebytheordinarysenseof individuality is lostand
anaestheticexperienceof thewholenessandunityof natureis achieved.Inthe
subsequentdevelopmentsof tragicdramathis immediateaestheticpleasure
(aesthetischen Genuss)becamelostthroughthemediationof actors,plots,scen-
ery,and other theatricaltrappings.YetintheearlyplaysofAeschyluswe see an
attemptto reachievetheoriginalaestheticpleasureof theDionysianotby avoid-
ing these mediationaltrappingsbut by combiningthemin a particular way.
Thus,withAeschylus,Greektragedybecamea "totalartform"(Gesamtkunst),
a Gestaltof thevisualarts(scenery,costumes,anddance)andtheauditoryarts
(poetryand music).19By combiningthese variousmodesand formsof aes-
theticexperiencein a unifiedway,the earlyplays of Aeschyluswereableto
bringabout,to some extent,the elementalrealizationof onenesswithnature
whichwas theoriginalpurposeandeffectof the earlierDionysia.
In his lecture"TheGreekMusicDrama"Nietzscheformsthe foundation
of thefirstof the"decisiveinnovations" expressedin TheBirthof Tragedy. The
functionalmotivebehindGreektragedyis describedas a "Dionysianphenom-
enon,"anattemptto bringabouta onenesswithnaturethroughaestheticexpe-
rience.Inhis secondpubliclectureof 1870,entitled"SocratesandTragedy," he
laysthegroundwork fortheseconddecisiveinnovation-theviewthatSocrates'
rationaloptimismrepresentsa fall fromanda distortionof theimmediateaes-
theticexperience of thenaturalandinstinctive"Dionysiantruth."HereNietzsche
expresses for the firsttime his unique to
alternative the well-entrenched dog-
mas thatregardSocratesas the highestexpressionof the true"Greekspirit"
18Nietzsche, "Das griechischeMusikdrama,"Nietzsche Werke:KritischeGesamtausgabe,
ed. G. Colli et al. (Berlin, 1973), III, 11.
19Ibid., 7-15.

This content downloaded from 91.229.248.22 on Tue, 10 Jun 2014 03:55:54 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
TheBirthof Tragedy 355

andthatsee reasonandscienceas the only truemeansfor understanding hu-

manreality.
ForNietzsche,the trueessenceof tragedyconsistsin its abilityto trans-
formthe ordinarypsychologicalstateof the observerto a morebasic,more
primitive,morenaturalone. In Greekliteraturethe earlyworksof Aeschylus
representthe clearestexpressionof this essentialfunction.As tragedydevel-
oped,however,it becameincreasinglycomplex.Whatwas originallya reli-
gious celebrationinvolvinga simple,antistrophicpoem, or dithyramb,had
becomea theatricaldramainvolvingcomplicatedplots, multiplecharacters
andcomplexformsof poeticexpression.Insteadof servingto transportthe
rationalmindof the spectatorto a moreprimitiveandirrationalstateof aes-
theticpleasure,the laterAtticdramasdependedfortheireffectupontheratio-
nalattentionof theobserver.Thetragediesof SophoclesandEuripidesin par-
ticularrequiredthe observerto maintaina consciousawarenessof everything
happeningon the stageandto thinkaboutit.
The shift of purposein tragicdrama-fromprovidingthe meansfor an
immediateaestheticrealizationof thefundamental unityof nature,to compel-
lingthespectatorto achievea rationalunderstanding of theapparent complex-
ity of the world-represents for Nietzschethe deathof tragedy: "this death-
struggleof tragedygoes by the nameEuripides,and is subsequentlyrecog-
nizedin the new artgenreof Atticcomedy."20 Thus,

thefloweringandhighpointof Greekmusicdramais Aeschylusin his

first great period, before he was influencedby Sophocles;with
Sophoclesthewholegradualdownfallbegins,untilfinallyEuripides,
with his consciousreactionagainstthe tragedyof Aeschylus,brings
the endaboutwiththeviolenceof a storm.2

NietzscheinsiststhatEuripidesrepresentsthedeathknellof Greektragedy
inasmuchas he introduced theSocraticworld-viewintoart:"Socratesdespised
instinct,and with it, art.He deniedthe honestwisdomwhichis exclusiveto
thisrealm."22Thisdistrustanddevaluation of the primordialpowerof the in-
stinctsin favorof whatis rationalshowsthat,

Socratesreallybelongedto a perverted, world.With

turned-on-its-head
allproductive naturestheunconscious
mindstraightforwardly
produces
in a creativeandaffirmativemanner,whereasthe consciousmindbe-

20
Nietzsche, "Socratesund die Tragoedie,"Nietzsche Werke,ed. G. Colli et al., III, 25.
21
Ibid., 41.
22
Ibid., 34.

This content downloaded from 91.229.248.22 on Tue, 10 Jun 2014 03:55:54 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
356 Dennis Sweet

haves criticallyand dissuades.With [Socrates]instinctbecomes critic,

and the conscious mind becomes creator.23

Socrates'faithin the intrinsicvalue of reasonis said to be motivatedby a drive

toward"Apollinianclarity";thus,Socratesis representedas the optimistic"herald
of science."24
However, Nietzsche contendsthat such optimism runs contraryto the es-
sence of tragedy,which was originally pessimistic in the extreme. It depicted
human existence as something terrible (schrecklich) and absurd (thoricht).25
But the Socraticattitude,with its "optimisticbelief in the necessary union of
virtueand knowledge, of happinessand virtue,"had, throughthe mediationof
Euripides'plays, introducedinto art a duality "betweennight and day, music
and mathematics."26 Hence, with Euripides,"tragedyturnedinto an optimistic
dialectic and ethic for reason ... and music dramaturnedinto a blemish, into
music, for reason."27
In the lectures "The Greek Music Drama"and "Socrates and Tragedy"
Nietzsche introducesthe seminal ideas that would become the foundationsof
the theoryexpressedin TheBirthof Tragedy,much of which was incorporated,
in some cases verbatim,into Sections 8-15 of the book. He suggests that the
trueand originalaesthetic value of Greektragedylies in its ability to bringthe
everyday consciousness of the observer to a more naturaland more unitary
state of awareness,and that this functionbecame lost with the intellectualiza-
tion of tragedyin the handsof Euripides,thatis, with his introductionof Socratic
rationalisminto drama.
Yet there is an obvious problemwith Nietzsche's account at this stage of
development.He says that the early plays of Aeschylus were able to achieve
somethingof the original aim of the ancientDionysia despite the fact thatthey
involved many of the same complexities which, in the plays of Sophocles and
Euripides,contributedto the demise of tragedy; for example, a multitudeof
characters,a diversityof poetic styles, the trappingsof dramaticstaging, and a
rationalplot. In Euripidesthese featureswere said to lead the spectatoraway
fromthe originalunityandaestheticpowerof the Dionysianexperience,whereas
in Aeschylus they were said to blend together into a new "total art form"and
Gestalt, which led the mind of the spectatorto an awareness of the aesthetic
pleasurecharacteristicof the Dionysian attitude.
Duringthe summerof 1870 Nietzsche wrote two essays which attemptto
come to terms with this problem. The solution he develops here would ulti-

23
Ibid.
24
Ibid., 36-37.
25
Ibid., 38.
26
Ibid., 39.
27
Ibid., 40.

This content downloaded from 91.229.248.22 on Tue, 10 Jun 2014 03:55:54 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
The Birth of Tragedy 357

mately become the heartof the theory presentedin TheBirth of Tragedy.The

first essay is entitled "The Dionysian World-view,"and the second is called
"The Birthof TragicThought."Since both make essentially the same points, I
shall limit my discussion to the first essay.
In the two public lecturesgiven in JanuaryandFebruaryof 1870 Nietzsche
had implicitly suggested a fundamentalcontrastbetween the Dionysian char-
acter of true tragedy,which involved an ecstatic/aestheticrealization of the
terrible,absurd,albeit creativepowers of nature,and the "Apollinianclarity"
thatcharacterizedEuripideantragedy,which involved a rationalunderstanding
of the worldas a logical andpurposefulphenomenon.In "TheDionysianWorld-
view" he makes this distinctionexplicit by drawinga sharpcontrastbetween
these two diametricallyopposedaspects of artandlife-the Dionysian impulse
and the Apollinian impulse. These impulses represent

an antithesisof styles in the domain of art, which almost always pro-

ceeds as a struggleof one againstthe other,andonly once appearfused
togetherin the flowering moment of the Hellenic "purpose,"through
the art of Attic tragedy.28

Whereas before the essence of tragedy was said to consist more or less
exclusively in the Dionysian impulse,Nietzsche now suggests thatthe essence
of tragedyconsists in the fusing together(verschmolzen)of both the Dionysian
and the Apollinian impulses. Dionysos is the god of the wild, uncontrolled
excesses of nature,who was dismemberedby his enemies and laterrestoredby
his brother,Apollo. Similarly,the Dionysian impulsein artrepresentsthe primi-
tive, unrestrainedenergies thatmust be broughttogether,sublimated,and har-
monized throughthe constructiveconstraintsof theApollinianimpulse.Apollo
now becomes the artist-god(Kunstgott),one who, throughthe use of meta-
phors and symbols, is able to representwhat is terribleand absurdin an artisti-
cally stylized and aestheticallypleasing way. Greektragedy,then, becomes the
purest expressionof this fusion of Dionysian matterwith Apollinian form:

For all [tragicart]aimedat transformingevery repulsivethoughtabout

the terrorand the absurdityof existence into representationsthat al-
lowed for life itself: these are the sublime, as the artistic mastery of
terror,and the ridiculous,as the artisticdischargeof an aversionto the
absurd.29

28
Nietzsche, "Die dionysische Weltanschauung,"Nietzsche Werke,ed. G. Colli et al., III,
45.
29
Ibid., 59.

This content downloaded from 91.229.248.22 on Tue, 10 Jun 2014 03:55:54 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
358 Dennis Sweet

Nietzsche's point here is that so long as the Apollinian imagery is recog-

nized as an artistic sublimation,or masking of the Dionysian impulse, the ef-
fect is truetragedy-an aestheticallygeneratedaffirmationof life in the face of
the terrorsof existence, throughthe medium of artisticrepresentation.When,
however, the Apollinian representationis (mis)interpretedas the truth,as the
substanceof artratherthan the symbol, then tragedybecomes ridiculous.30
This tendency to mistake the superficialfor the fundamental,and to em-
phasize the appearanceover the reality, led ultimately to the conception of
tragic dramaas a mere harmonyof plot, music, and poetry,the point of which
is to lead the observer to the rationaldiscovery of a logical, underlyingpur-
pose. While the plays of Sophocles reflect the beginnings of this tendency to
find a resolutionof conflict vis-a-vis a higher,divine purpose,all of Euripides'
plays (with the possible exception of his last play, the Bacchae) conclude by
"explaining"why what happenedhappened.In Euripides even the most ter-
rible actions and events are ultimately shown to make sense, to be rational,to
be for the best. Thus, "purposeand its symbol-harmony-are both finally
groundedin pure logic!"3'

Conclusion

The theories of classical art developed by Winckelmannand by Lessing

attemptedto draw conclusions about the ancient Greek world-view through
inferences based upon the observationand comparisonof artisticphenomena
such as statues, paintings,poems, and plays. As an art historianWinckelmann
put more theoreticalweight upon the Greek visual arts of paintingand sculp-
ture.As a critic and playwrightLessing based his theory more upon works of
Greek literature,particularlyupon the plays of Sophocles, and the analyses of
these provided by Aristotle and other ancient writers.Yet by basing his inter-
pretationof Greekaestheticson the laterhybridsof Sophoclean(andEuripidean)
drama,Lessing had,accordingto Nietzsche, misunderstoodandmisrepresented
the basic motive of Greekart.For Lessing Greektragedyaimed at the didactic
beautywhich emergeswhen the subjective,emotional,and irrationalaspects of
humanlife are subduedby and subsumedundera higher,rationalpurpose.For
Nietzsche, this view is no less superficialthanWinckelmann's.It mistakes the
derivativefunctionof tragedyfor the primaryfunction,and the superficialpur-
pose for the real purpose.
With the acknowledgmentof the two radically differentartisticimpulses,
that is, the creative Dionysian and the representationalApollinian, Nietzsche
has finally "steppedout beyond"Lessing andhas establishedthe two "decisive
innovations"thatarethe heartof TheBirthof Tragedy.Accordingto Nietzsche,
30
Ibid., 62-63.
31
Ibid., 66.

This content downloaded from 91.229.248.22 on Tue, 10 Jun 2014 03:55:54 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
TheBirthof Tragedy 359

thelaterformsof Atticdramahadmisrepresented theoriginalfunctionof trag-

edy. The primary function and goal of Greek drama was to bringaboutan
immediateecstatic/aesthetic experienceof the terriblepowerof natureas an
irrational,instinctiveforce, to do so throughthemediationof variouscon-
but
trolledandharmonized modesof expression(poetry,music,dance,costumes,
etc.). In the plays of Sophoclesand Euripidesthe representing becomesthe
represented, the maskbecomesthe face, the mediumbecomesthe message.
Theharmony,rationality, andoptimismwhichcharacterize theApollinianas-
of
pect tragedy became ends in themselvesand ceasedto be therepresentations
of a morebasic,instinctive,andpessimistic(Dionysian)view of life.
Nietzsche'sdevelopmentof theseviews in his writingsof 1869-70repre-
sentthebirthof TheBirthof Tragedy.It is herethathe fulfillshis stateddesire
to "stepout beyondLessing";andin so doing,he lays the foundationof his
subsequent philosophical development, his self-imposedtask,"totranslateman
backin nature."

ChathamCollege.

This content downloaded from 91.229.248.22 on Tue, 10 Jun 2014 03:55:54 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions