# Nietzsche on Beethoven



## Razumovskymas (Sep 20, 2016)

Excerption from "Untimely Meditations" by Friedrich Nietzsche:

_"Before Wagner, music was as a whole narrowly bounded; it applied to the steady, permanent states of mankind, to that which the Greeks called ethos, and it was only with Beethoven that it began to discover the language of pathos, of passionate desire, of the dramatic events which take place in the depths of man. Formerly the objective was to give expression in sound to a mood, a state of determination or cheerfulness or reverence or penitence; by means of a certain striking uniformity of form, and through protracting this uniformity for some time, one wanted to compel the listener to interpret the mood of the music and in the end to be transported into it himself. Different forms were needed for each of these images of different moods and states; other forms were determined by convention. The question of length was a matter for the judgment of the composer, who, while wanting to transport the listener into a certain mood, did not want to bore him by going on for too long. A further step was taken when images of antithetic moods were placed one after the other and the charm of contrast was discovered, and a further step still when a single musical movement took into itself an antithetical ethos, for example by allowing a masculine theme to come into conflict with a feminine theme. All these are still rude and primitive stages of music. The first law originated in fear of passion, the second in fear of boredom; all deepening and excess of feeling was felt to be 'unethical'. But when the art of ethos had presented the same customary states and moods in hundredfold repetition it finally succumbed to exhaustion, notwithstanding the marvellous inventiveness of its masters. Beethoven was the first to let music speak a new language, the hitherto forbidden language of passion: but because his art had grown out of the laws and conventions of the art of ethos, and had as it were to try to justify itself before them, his artistic development was peculiarly difficult and beset with con* fusions. An inner dramatic event - for every passion takes a dramatic course - wanted to break through to a new form, but the traditional scheme of the music of moods set itself in opposition and spoke against it almost as morality speaks against the rise of immorality. It sometimes seems as though Beethoven had set himself the contradictory task of expressing pathos through the forms of ethos. This idea is, however, inadequate to his last and greatest works. To reproduce the great vaulting arch of a passion he really did discover a new means: he removed individual portions of its flightpath and illuminated these with the greatest distinctness, so that from them the listener would divine the entire curve. Viewed superficially, the new form seemed like several musical movements put together, each of them apparently representing a single enduring state, in reality however a moment in the dramatic course of the passion. It could happen that the listener would think he was hearing the old music of mood but failing to grasp the relationship of the several parts to one another, which could no longer be understood by reference to the old canon of antithetical parts. Even among com*posers there arose a contempt for the demand for the construction of an artistic whole, and the sequence of the parts of their works became arbitrary. The invention of the grand form for the ex*pression of passion led via a misunderstanding back to the single movement with whatever content the composer might choose, and tension between different parts of a work ceased altogether. That is why the symphony after Beethoven is such a strangely confused structure, especially when in its individual parts it still stammers the language of Beethovenian pathos. The means are not appropriate to the objective, and the objective as a whole is not at l clear to the listener because it was never clear to the composer either. But the demand that one should have something quite definite to say, and that one should say it as clearly as possible, is the more indispensable the higher, more difficult and more ambitious a species of work is."_


----------



## MarkW (Feb 16, 2015)

I'd love to see what Nietzsche would have thought of Mahler.


----------



## Larkenfield (Jun 5, 2017)

It’s true that the Classical era that Nietzsche refers to was connected to the Greek ethos. But I think it could be argued whether Nietzsche was accurate on musical analysis or not because he makes a number of sweeping statements that are hard to decipher exactly what he means: “The first law originated in fear of passion, the second in fear of boredom; all deepening and excess of feeling was felt to be 'unethical'.” Really? “The fear of passion”? I wonder what that feels like? I have no idea. Sometimes even the great thinkers deserve to be questioned because they can get lost in their own questionable abstract thinking. Genius is knowing how far to go too far.


----------



## flamencosketches (Jan 4, 2019)

I can't read a block of italic text that large on my screen  

If someone would care to break it up into paragraphs, I'd love to read it.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Nietzsche is one of the most insightful yet biased thinkers in history, always out to prove something, and to do it in as provocative a way as possible. His first sentence here reveals that he had been under the spell of Wagner in his early manhood, and if someone told me that this essay was written by the composer I would easily believe it. The ideas expressed no doubt resulted from Nietzsche's close personal contact with Wagner, and evince a Romantic view of music as uninhibited emotional expression, which Nietzsche and Wagner saw as first appearing in Beethoven and as reaching fulfillment - of course - in the work of Wagner himself. We can credit him with describing the Classical "doctrine of affects" - the artistic presentation of emotions in terms of certain conventions - in contrast to the more freewheeling Romantics, and with recognizing Beethoven as a transitional figure, without necessarily agreeing that in Beethoven's work there's a conflict between (Classical) form and (Romantic) content.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

flamencosketches said:


> I can't read a block of italic text that large on my screen
> 
> If someone would care to break it up into paragraphs, I'd love to read it.


I've been lamenting the same thing for years now. Nobody knows what a paragraph is anymore.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

I've been trying to decide what Nietzsche bio to purchase? The old Walter Kaufmann edition or I Am Dynamite! by Sue Prideaux.


----------



## flamencosketches (Jan 4, 2019)

I always liked Kaufmann's translations of his works; that is the one I would go for.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

starthrower said:


> I've been lamenting the same thing for years now. Nobody knows what a paragraph is anymore.


I weep and wail with you. If writers can't organize and categorize thoughts, they just go on and on till they're out of thoughts, or else they give every thought its own paragraph so that if they need to review something they've said they can find it easily.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

I'll probably get the Kaufmann first. I saw a new edition at Barnes & Noble.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

When I see a mass of text like that it gives me instant fatigue. I don't want to struggle that hard to read it.


----------



## amfortas (Jun 15, 2011)

It's worth keeping in mind Nietzsche's later work, his vehement rejection of Wagner and Romanticism. For better or worse, he came to see his own earlier writings as hopelessly misguided, written under the spell of Wagner's domineering influence.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

amfortas said:


> It's worth keeping in mind Nietzsche's later work, his vehement rejection of Wagner and Romanticism. For better or worse, he came to see his own earlier writings as hopelessly misguided, written under the spell of Wagner's domineering influence.


Nietzsche remained ambivalent about his own "Wagnerian side," and the discomfort certainly fueled the vehement sarcasm of some of his later commentary. He wrote a ferocious denunciation of _Parsifal_ and Wagner's supposed capitulation to religion, but later wrote a beautiful tribute to the music of the same opera and its power over his emotions.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Larkenfield said:


> It's true that the Classical era that Nietzsche refers to was connected to the Greek ethos. But I think it could be argued whether Nietzsche was accurate on musical analysis or not because he makes a number of sweeping statements that are hard to decipher exactly what he means: "The first law originated in fear of passion, the second in fear of boredom; all deepening and excess of feeling was felt to be 'unethical'." Really? "The fear of passion"? I wonder what that feels like? I have no idea. Sometimes even the great thinkers deserve to be questioned because they can get lost in their own questionable abstract thinking. Genius is knowing how far to go too far.


But as a musician and composer, Nietzsche doesn't hold that much more important a position in music history compared to say, Albert Einstein. It's interesting to note that none of the 'great composers', Richard Strauss, Mahler, Ravel, Saint-Saens, who have or would eventually become mainstream, had the same view as him regarding this matter.
For example, a contemporary of Nietzsche, Brahms (who himself ranks as one of the greatest in history) even said something to the effect that people tend to overlook the artistry of the old masters in favor of the immediate appeal of the new, Beethoven.

_"One must be able to distinguish between the charm that comes from newness and the value that is intrinsic to a work." _
https://books.google.ca/books?id=7iwZ-qTuSkUC&pg=PA134#v=onepage&q&f=false
https://books.google.ca/books?id=7iwZ-qTuSkUC&pg=PA135#v=onepage&q&f=false


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

hammeredklavier said:


> But as a musician and composer, Nietzsche doesn't hold that much more important a position in music history compared to say, Albert Einstein. It's interesting to note that none of the 'great composers', Richard Strauss, Mahler, Ravel, Saint-Saens, who have or would eventually become mainstream, had the same view as him regarding this matter.
> For example, a contemporary of Nietzsche, Brahms (who himself ranks as one of the greatest in history) even said something to the effect that people tend to overlook the artistry of the old masters in favor of the immediate appeal of the new, Beethoven.
> 
> _"One must be able to distinguish between the charm that comes from newness and the value that is intrinsic to a work." _
> ...


What do these remarks by Brahms have to do with what Nietzsche was saying?


----------



## Larkenfield (Jun 5, 2017)

hammeredklavier said:


> But as a musician and composer, Nietzsche doesn't hold that much more important a position in music history compared to say, Albert Einstein. It's interesting to note that none of the 'great composers', Richard Strauss, Mahler, Ravel, Saint-Saens, who have or would eventually become mainstream, had the same view as him regarding this matter.
> For example, a contemporary of Nietzsche, Brahms (who himself ranks as one of the greatest in history) even said something to the effect that people tend to overlook the artistry of the old masters in favor of the immediate appeal of the new, Beethoven.
> 
> _"One must be able to distinguish between the charm that comes from newness and the value that is intrinsic to a work." _
> ...


Friedrich Nietzsche's influential proclamation that "God is dead" was taken seriously at the time as the final word on philosophy by many intellectuals and artists. But what does it matter what the collective opinion is if one leaves out one's own personal experience and reaction to his statement? I have never found that statement to be true, despite going through my own personal doubts, and yet some have swallowed that edic hook line and sinker because they had raised him up to the level of the ultimate philosopher and thinker, despite his being severely dysfunctional at different times in his life, for one reason or another, including his disillusionment over the loss of the woman in his life.

But I think he was read and did have an influence on music because of the lack of spirituality, or whatever one wants to call it, that took place within society and with certain composers during the turbulent 20th century that was more psychological and interested in the abnormal than the spirituality or the higher aspects of religion. The century was full of political insanity and the senseless death of millions through war and other upheavals.

But I think that era is over, though they are still reminders from the people who survived the horrors, and people have not forgotten about the best of the artistic past, not Beethoven, not Mozart, not Mahler, not the other immortals. They are still being appreciated by the eternal 3% of the population who seem to the love the music such as yourself.

I believe that what probably happened to Nietzsche is that he went through such a state of disillusionment in his personal life, not to mention the syphilis that he may have suffered from, and just about everything lost meaning-"God is dead! "-except perhaps the movement of his own thoughts that came up with a great deal of insight that wasn't necessarily true because I can relate very little to what he wrote about Beethoven. I doubt it if Beethoven himself would have a cared for anything that Nietzsche wrote about him or would have agreed with him. So how could he have possibly been right about the composer?


----------



## Larkenfield (Jun 5, 2017)

For sn examination of the life of Friedrich Nietzsche, look for “Genius of the Modern World” on Netflix streaming.


----------



## Razumovskymas (Sep 20, 2016)

Nice to read all this interesting comments!

I regard Nietzsche mainly as a brilliant intuitive free thinker with an impressive writing style and an interesting intellectual background (classical philology) who has a huge respect for the ideas, religions and cultural phenomena he critiques so passionately. Before I read (all of) Nietzsche I was more an atheïst then after and my respect (and genuine curiosity) for religion an other ideas in general has grown. Before Nietzsche I rejected ideas that where not mine, after Nietzsche I am more open and willing to listen to other ideas.

About the "God is dead" quote: I think that is probably the worst quote to summarize Nietzsches' work.

For what he wrote about Beethoven I can only say that as a big Beethoven admirer for more then 10 years, my thought when I read it was: "Spot on" I never read a better description of Beethovens music.


----------



## Triplets (Sep 4, 2014)

My favorite Nietzsche quote is when is comparing Bizet to Wagner: “Bizet’s music doesn’t sweat”


----------

