Theory of Religion

Known by some as the "metaphysician of evil", Bataille's book on religion is what is basically a Nietzschean approach to theology - thus much of it illustrates the importance of the darker side of faith, such as the necessity of suffering, sacrifice, and even evil itself. However, there is a lot more going on here than a simple commentary on religion. There is discussion of man's relation to animality, the lost intimacy we seek, and Bataille challenges our perception of objects. This is much broader in the scope of subjects it covers than I thought it would be, and it certainly will be confusing to some who are unfamiliar with philosophy, especially those who have no introduction to Nietzsche's works. One thing I disliked about this book (which seems to be a recurring theme in many philosophical writings), is the author's tendency to repeat things over and over. I understand the value of restating ideas many times to impress something upon one's memory, but this does get quite redundant in some arguments and concepts Bataille presents. As another reviewer mentioned, this is purposefully vague for the fact that it does try to be everything to all religions. If Nietzsche's thoughts and assertions have captured your interest, Bataille is the next logical step. It is a sort of "re-evaluation" of the values the author sees in religion.

George Bataille's "Theory of Religion" is an attempt to sum up religion in as succinct a manner as possible. To be all things to all religions, the book is very vague and difficult to understand. Bataille created a chart or table to explain what he was doing and to give body to the work. ALAS! The chart is not in the book, lost to time. Thus, as it exists, Bataille's book is a glimpse into the inner workings of a genius mind. It is a colorful attempt to understand "religion," whatever that is. Further, it is an off-the beaten path romp through the daisies of the study of religion, sweet flowers that often remain unromped.

In On Nietzsche Bataille became Nietzsche. Here Bataille becomes the reader and consumes her/him/it(the thing). Who knows why Bataille never published this mistresspiece in his lifetime. Maybe even Bataille didn't know....