# Wagner, Schopenhauer, the Buddha & SEX...



## GrosseFugue (Nov 30, 2011)

So I am reading Bryan Magee's "The Tristan Chord: Wagner & Philosophy" and it is full of fascinating stuff about Schopenhauer's influence on Wagner. The guy was essentially a Buddhist. (And Wagner's last work in progress was apparently about the Buddha).

But several aspects confound me and I wanted to ask any of the Wagner/philosophy people out there for clarification.

The main thing that confuses is Schopenhauer's stance on Sex. Bryan Magee, who paraphrases him, writes: *"Orgasm is not only the ultimate experience but a quasi-mystical one that carries us to the very centre of life's mystery."*

The idea is clearly seen in Tristan und Isolde.

And YET...sex in Schopenhauer's scheme of things it is also part of the Will -- that incessant driving, striving, greedy force behind all life. And to attain true freedom you must renounce the Will. Which is to be celibate and without material wealth (a true ascetic life). "*The only thing to do...is turn our backs on the whole thing, refuse to be involved, have nothing whatever to do with it."*

So which is it? Sex is Good or Bad?

For that matter -- Art is also put on the same level as sex for its ability to uncover the Truth about the world. But the Truth is that we're all always pushing on blindly for things that can never satisfy.

So is Art Good or Bad?

Neither of them "renounces" the Will, but merely shows it more clearly.

So I'm not sure how Sex and Art is doing anybody any good in that context.

(Oh, I should say that I am speaking in relation to the philosophy, not to my own personal opinions. )

Another huge discrepancy is the plain fact that Wagner (ostensibly) fully embraced the philosophy, going so far as to keep a statue of the Buddha in his house. And YET...he lived a lifestyle completely at odds with Schopenhauer's advice: profligate, megalomaniacal, status-driven, etc. I wonder how he was able to reconcile that.


----------



## Chi_townPhilly (Apr 21, 2007)

GrosseFugue said:


> So I am reading Bryan Magee's "The Tristan Chord: Wagner & Philosophy" and it is full of fascinating stuff about Schopenhauer's influence on Wagner. *The guy was essentially a Buddhist.* (emphasis mine)


I'm not sure... but I that last point in bold just _might_ be an oversimplification.


GrosseFugue said:


> The main thing that confuses is Schopenhauer's stance on Sex. Bryan Magee, who paraphrases him, writes: "Orgasm is not only the ultimate experience but a quasi-mystical one that carries us to the very centre of life's mystery."
> 
> And YET...sex in Schopenhauer's scheme of things it is also part of the Will -- that incessant driving, striving, greedy force behind all life. And to attain true freedom you must renounce the Will. Which is to be celibate and without material wealth (a true ascetic life). "The only thing to do...is turn our backs on the whole thing, refuse to be involved, have nothing whatever to do with it."


One of the interesting things about Wagner is that he sampled many of the intellectual currents of his day- alliances between anarchism & socialism (the Dresden barricades), the writings of Feuerbach, pan-Germanism, a re-direct to enlightened despotism (opportunistically- upon the ascension of Ludwig II). Perhaps his most enduring embrace was that of Schopenhauer- but he exempted himself from its stern measures. The grounds for the seeming "special plea" was likely uniqueness. [In Wagner's own words: "I am not made like other people." "The World owes me what I need."] Doubtless there was a measure of self-indulgence in this-- but Wagner also said it was a requirement for his artistic process. [Thank G_d for posterity he didn't turn his back on Art!] It's reliably reported that the Wagner fondness for Schopenhauer was NOT reciprocated- understandably enough. To pull the James King quote that I mentioned back here: "[Wagner's] ego was such that he believed he deserved to be rewarded and rewarded handsomely for the art that he brought into being. On this point, at least, he and I are in agreement."

I've had the opportunity to reflect on a famous Walt Whitman quote as it pertains to Wagner. I'm reminded of it again here-
"Do I contradict myself?
Very well, then- I contradict myself,
(I am large, I contain multitudes.)"


GrosseFugue said:


> For that matter -- Art is also put on the same level as sex for its ability to uncover the Truth about the world. But the Truth is that we're all always pushing on blindly for things that can never satisfy.


As far as I know, Schopenhauer assigned a scale of significance to various art-forms, placing music at the pinnacle... a position that one would imagine to be of some comfort and congeniality to Wagner. Clearly, if Art (including music) is serving to highlight deeper truths, then Art is all to the good- for Wagner, Schopenhauer-or [hopefully] any of us.


----------



## GrosseFugue (Nov 30, 2011)

Chi_townPhilly said:


> As far as I know, Schopenhauer assigned a scale of significance to various art-forms, placing music at the pinnacle... a position that one would imagine to be of some comfort and congeniality to Wagner. Clearly, if Art (including music) is serving to highlight deeper truths, then Art is all to the good- for Wagner, Schopenhauer-or [hopefully] any of us.


Right, Schopenhauer put Music at the top for its ability to highlight "deeper truths." But my understanding is that Schopenhauer saw the "deeper truth" as basically evil or as Bryan Magee puts it:

*"Since, according to his philosophy, the noumenal and phenomenal worlds are the same reality viewed in different ways, it followed for him that the noumenal is something terrible. He saw it as a blind, purposeless, impersonal force or drive entirely non-moral, unconcerned with anything to do with life or living creatures."
*

The "noumenal" being the immaterial, timeless, spaceless True Reality. So that's the big inconsistency that I don't get in relation in Wagner.

Because what he's doing then -- according to Schopenhauerian Principles -- is just showing us how lousy and doomed we all are. That's not quite the elevating purpose behind Art that I think most people have in mind.


----------



## Chi_townPhilly (Apr 21, 2007)

GrosseFugue said:


> ...what he's doing then -- according to Schopenhauerian Principles -- is just showing us how lousy and doomed we all are. That's not quite the elevating purpose behind Art that I think most people have in mind.


If one reads just some of the vast mass of self-justifying material Wagner wrote (and, arguably, he had more of _that_ than any artist of similar repute, in ANY medium), you'll find that Wagner was not looking to fulfill a Schopenhauerian ideal with the creation of his art, but instead argues from a historicist perspective that he's looking to reclaim a lost ideal that hearkens back to the ancient Greek playwrights.

I'm grateful that Bryan Magee's an energetic author- and his highly accessible "Aspects of Wagner" should be on a mandatory reading list for additional information on Wagner. However, we should always keep in mind that much of Wagner's thought was _informed_ by the philosophy of Schopenhauer- but it certainly wasn't driven or ruled by it.


----------



## bigshot (Nov 22, 2011)

I've always found that it's better to listen to Wagner than to read about it. It's also better to participate in sex than to read about it... So I suppose there is a link there somewhere.


----------



## GrosseFugue (Nov 30, 2011)

Chi_townPhilly said:


> If one reads just some of the vast mass of self-justifying material Wagner wrote (and, arguably, he had more of _that_ than any artist of similar repute, in ANY medium), you'll find that Wagner was not looking to fulfill a Schopenhauerian ideal with the creation of his art, but instead argues from a historicist perspective that he's looking to reclaim a lost ideal that hearkens back to the ancient Greek playwrights.
> 
> I'm grateful that Bryan Magee's an energetic author- and his highly accessible "Aspects of Wagner" should be on a mandatory reading list for additional information on Wagner. However, we should always keep in mind that much of Wagner's thought was _informed_ by the philosophy of Schopenhauer- but it certainly wasn't driven or ruled by it.


Actually, Magee would disagree with you there. Here's his thoughts:

*"There are some supremely great works of art in which a particular system of ideas or beliefs has been so completely digested that their authenticity as art is independent of the ideas they express. Tristan and Isolde is a work of this kind. It s very conception was Schopenhauerian -- indeed, to adapt a phrase from Ernest Newman, it is Schopenhauer from centre to periphery."*

Which brings me right back to the dilemma -- how to reconcile horrible Reality with making Art. I mean to be truly Schopenhauerian would be to turn your back on the world and live in a cave and don't compose at all; just meditate.

BTW, Magee talks about the Greek influence, but that Wagner basically shed all that after he got into Schonpenhauer.


----------



## Chi_townPhilly (Apr 21, 2007)

GrosseFugue said:


> Actually, Magee would disagree with you there.


I'll accept this. After all, Magee's sympathies would incline him to emphasize the philosophical angle, as much of his adult energy was devoted to popularizing comment on philosophy.

The sheer vastness of the Wagner artistic enterprise provides ample opportunities for people to cite in Wagner's art examples that incline towards people's predispositions. This phenomenon is well-enough-known to Wagnerians of any manner of experience. A book could be written about this state of affairs.

Even if one were to grant Magee's point concerning _Tristan und Isolde_, it's _one_ of Wagner's 10 canonical operas. But at bottom, it doesn't really matter what _Magee_ says about Wagner's Art, nor what _I_ say about it- but what _Wagner_ says about it (absent any evidence of intentional misdirection).

I know I'm repeating myself, but perhaps Wagner's most quotable citation concerning Art was his re-working of The Creed:


> I believe in God, Mozart and Beethoven, and likewise their disciples and apostles; - I believe in the Holy Spirit and the truth of the one, indivisible Art; - I believe that this Art proceeds from God, and lives within the hearts of all illumined men; - I believe that he who once has bathed in the sublime delights of this high Art, is consecrate to Her for ever, and never can deny Her; - I believe that through Art all men are saved.





GrosseFugue said:


> Which brings me right back to the dilemma -- how to reconcile horrible Reality with making Art. I mean to be truly Schopenhauerian would be to turn your back on the world and live in a cave and don't compose at all; just meditate.


Well- you take Wagner's own quote and add it to your observation here- and you're left with the conclusion that Wagner is, after all, not _truly_ Schopenhauerian...

There's another Wagner quote known to me. I'm not sure about the year of its minting... but it sounds just perfect for his falling-out with Nietzsche:


> Too much time [is spent] on the meaning of life, and not enough time spent getting on with the business of living.


_That_'s not a terribly "Schopenhauerian" thing to say.


----------

