Nietzsche's Philosophy of Art

I read this book for a graduate seminar on the philosophy of art. Julian Young in "Nietzsche's Philosophy of Art," does an excellent job of elucidating Nietzsche's "Birth of Tragedy" and "On The Genealogy of Morality," which begin to shape or force the latter character of his thought, which is an affirmation of life. An affirmation of life, even with its tragic character rather than an affirmation of life without tragedy. Nietzsche agrees with Schopenhauer about the nature of reality being dark. He accepts Plato's characterization about tragedy, but affirms tragedy instead of wanting to ban it like Plato argued for in his "Republic." He rejects Aristotle' formalism, Nietzsche rejects Kant's notion of disinterest, and its life denying implications, the whole idea that you have to be disinterested in art is a complete contradiction of the vitality of art. It betrays a kind of life denying implication, if the point of art is to find a zone to turn off ones interests, then why would you think that, that is valuable. Why would someone think that that is a good thing? Nietzsche accepts the idea of genius and like Hegel, although not in the same way as Hegel, Nietzsche elevates art to a high level, by saying that art and reality mirror each other, in that art is a kind of forming formlessness and that is the way reality is. Nietzsche had a big influence on 20th century art. Nietzsche unlike Aristotle insists on a religious component in tragedy, the two main Greek myth currents is Apollo and Dionysus. By associating these two religious sects with tragedy, it is more historically true for Nietzsche. He observes Greek tragedy and Dionysian religion and its character. The image of Greek culture was one of being measured and civilized, however Nietzsche sees the Dionysian religion was dark and violent and irrational as well. Tragedies were performed at Dionysian festivals it is a "nature" based religion, celebrating the cycle of life, both birth and death. The world is like a restaurant, all living things live off other living things. Dionysian rites probably included animal sacrifices, maybe human as well. Dionysus was an unusual deity in Greece; he was the only one to suffer death and to be brought back to life, unlike other Olympian deities. Dionysian religion was very popular in Greece; Apollonian religion was very popular as well. Nietzsche says tragedy has something to do with Dionysius religions dark side. One of the best sources of the Dionysian religion is Euripides in the "Bacchae." There is some question about his intent in writing the "Bacchae." Euripides turns against his Greek tragic tradition by showing the Greeks the absurdities and ironies in their tragic tradition with his plays, which also essentially recommend that Greeks turn away from their form of tragedy. Euripidean heroes are usually rebelling against the state rather than accommodating it. However, the "Bacchae" is an unusual play because it seems to b

Young's book is billed as the first comprehensive treatment of Nietzsche's philosophy of art to appear in English. This alone makes it a necessity in the library of anyone interested in Nietzsche and Nietzsche's relation to Wagner and to Schopenhauer. But furthermore, Young's evident mastery of the Nietzsche material and his clear writing, make the book not only necessary, but a pleasurable and worthwhile read. Young's "Nietzsche's philosophy of art" calls for a serious reader's engagement even if one must disagree on Young's overall thesis, which this reviewer must do. Young is clearly prepared to write on Nietzsche's philosophy of art. He has already authored a book on Schopenhauer, called "Willing and Unwilling," and has a demonstrable sensitivity to and experience with artworks and art theory. Young begins his book with a treatment of Schopenhauer and Schopenhauer's philosophy of art -- both in terms of how Nietzsche understood them. Nietzsche's famous philosophical relationship to Schopenhauer is well explained. The brilliant and enthusiastic young Nietzsche devoured Schopenhauer and as Young writes, "Except for the Greeks, there is no other philosopher he knew with anything like the same intimacy. His writings, all of them, are full not just of quotations and paraphrases from Schopenhauer, but of phrases, allusions, and rhythms both conscious and unconscious. Nietzsche breathed Schopenhauer and cannot be understood without him." Nietzsche always acknowledged a debt to Schopenhauer, even in his later writings, but it is essential to an understanding of the force of Nietzsche's philosophy (and particularly his central notion of "independence of the soul") to see that after Birth of Tragedy (and somewhat within Birth of Tragedy) Nietzsche sets himself adamantly and effectively against Schopenhauer's and Wagner's romanticism, and against the "cry baby optimism" of his age in general. Young understands correctly, I think, that Nietzsche turned against Schopenhauer early and Wagner too. But after a series of slight misinterpretations, particularly of Nietzsche's treatment of science, his metaphysics or understanding of the natural world, and his ideas of art in "Human, All to Human," Young's over-arching claim is that Nietzsche fails in his anti-Romantic endeavor to live without metaphysics and redemption, and in the end returns to a Schopenhauerian pessimistic philosophy. For those who see Nietzsche as accomplishing a systematic rebuttal to Romanticism and transcendental philosophies, Young's conclusion that Nietzsche's philosophy is circular or returns to the foil against which it first defined itself, will be unsatisfactory.

Exceedingly well written. Suitable for those interested in art not just those who are philosophers. Sympathetic to Nietzsche yet critical. A joyous read.