Guide Foglie cadute. Libro secondo (Italian Edition)

Free download. Book file PDF easily for everyone and every device. You can download and read online Foglie cadute. Libro secondo (Italian Edition) file PDF Book only if you are registered here. And also you can download or read online all Book PDF file that related with Foglie cadute. Libro secondo (Italian Edition) book. Happy reading Foglie cadute. Libro secondo (Italian Edition) Bookeveryone. Download file Free Book PDF Foglie cadute. Libro secondo (Italian Edition) at Complete PDF Library. This Book have some digital formats such us :paperbook, ebook, kindle, epub, fb2 and another formats. Here is The CompletePDF Book Library. It's free to register here to get Book file PDF Foglie cadute. Libro secondo (Italian Edition) Pocket Guide.
Confessioni di un Italiano (Italian Edition) eBook: Ippolito Nievo: efycymepodor.tk: Kindle-Shop. Questo libro di Nievo è un romanzo di educazione dei sentimenti. Dopo la caduta di Napoleone, Carlo diventa liberale e si arruola tra le forze di Guglielmo Pepe. Il profumo delle foglie di tè (eNewton Narrativa) (Italian Edition).
Table of contents



URL consultato il 24 marzo URL consultato il 30 marzo The Insects of Australia: Incurvarioidea , in Entomologica Scandinavica Supplementum , vol. URL consultato il 10 gennaio Immature Insects , vol. Oord, Baltsvlucht van Nemophora degeerella Linnaeus Lep. Vallardi, maggio [] , pp. URL consultato il 31 marzo Scoble, A new incurvariine leaf-miner from South Africa, with comments on structure, life-history, phylogeny and the binomial system of nomenclature Lepidoptera: Incurvariidae abstract , in Journal of the Entomological Society of southern Africa , vol. Horae Societatis entomologicae vossicae, variis semonibus in Russia usitatis editae , vol.

Theresianum , Vienna, Augustin Bernardi, , 1 - Editio decima, reformata , Stoccolma, Laurentius Salvius, , 1 Kozlov, Nematopogon taiwanella sp. Adelidae , in Tijdschrift voor Entomologie , vol. URL consultato il 29 dicembre Jent et Gassmann pp. Insectes, Parigi, Masson, , pp. Incurvarioidea indicates a rapid ecological diversification of the yucca moths. Annals of the Entomological Society of America Nepticuloidea PDF , in Smithsonian contributions to zoology , vol. First report of the family Eriocottidae from the New World, with descriptions of new taxa , in Proceedings of the Entomological Society of Washington , vol.

Zoologisk museum, , pp. Bulletin of the United States National Museum , Entomological series , vol. Revista de la Sociedad Entomologica Argentina International Journal of Insect Morphology and Embryology 27 3: A contribution to the morphology and phylogeny of the Micropterigidae, with a generic catalogue of the family Lepidoptera: Zeugloptera , in Steenstrupia , vol.

Journal of Insect Conservation , 1 , 73— Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society Micropterygidae , in Genera Insectorum , fasc. Verhandlungen der Zoologisch-Botanischen Gesellschaft in Wien Transactions of the Entomological Society of London 2 3 8: Monographs on Australian Lepidoptera 4: Annals and Magazine of Natural History 5 Arnoldo Mondadori Editore, pp. Holometabola of the world. New Micro-lepidoptera — mostly from Queensland.

Transactions of the Royal Society of South Australia Typology of vermin, topology of expulsion, catharsis. Exclusion of the Chandala. A time will come, is fated to come, when he will sign himself Dionysus. In the voyages toward Iran , India and the Semitic civilizations , the course set by The Birth of Tragedy is kept to , its range extended. From Hippocrates to Sophocles, from the worm to the proper name of the type, from medicine to tragedy, from purgative to catharsis, from Hellenism to western humanity: Fascism, be it said in passing, will arise in Europe out of this obsession: Rene Girard has dealt with this very well and I will not elaborate on it here.

Hence this conclusion, unavoidable by sheer weight of evidence: The Antichrist is not an antireligious treatise, not even a treatise on the history of religions; it is a treatise of religion, a religious treaty, a hierogony. Christ signifies the anointed, the sacred; Antichrist , before the sacred. Resuming - by the reinscription of tragedy, the birth of tragedy; by the resumption of biochemistry, the origin of life, the origin of life's knowledge.

And thus the declared program is carried out. We are at the third stage, scientific knowledge. I say the virus and it is a virus; I say that it must be passed through the fire and I seek out a fire that can kill the worm. But this operation has, for millenia, been performed on other terrains, on the same culture.

The culture broth is aptly named: The vermin is the invalid positive stage ; the invalid has been declared to be evil metaphysical stage ; and the evil, malevolent one turns out to be SOMEONE religious stage. In the classical age, scientific discourse passed over into philosophy, without translation - in its results and its semantics. Only its syntax is carried over now and no one sees anything more in it. A fine trick has been played. That Descartes was a geometer and Leibniz an algebrist is obvious to all but the blind; it is a little more difficult to read the mechanics of Marx, the physics of Freud, and the chemistry ofNietzsche.

It can be apprehended at the level of the signifier: And yet, he maintains, I use corruption as a word free of moral toxin. The Antichrist 49 "moralin," ''. What remains is the preparation, the primary mixture. The whole process is chemical: Corruption is indeed a reaction , the fundamental reaction, repeated countless times in the text - whence the dynamic valuation of the operation, like a valuation in chemical thermodynamics.

In the course of this production energies are in play. Energies over time , that is to say, a power. It thrives on failing energy, on its dissipation, its entropic devaluation, its decadence. And if science makes a law of this decline, one must then overturn this science, produce an increase in power, will the vital transvaluation of power and hence will the eternal return - that is, perpetual motion of the second kind. But Nietzsche also says grace , for the second: Swamplands of reaction , of corruption: A decline in power brings decadence and reaction.

A rise in power must be willed; it is neither natural nor inevitable. The eternal return and the exclusion ofreason, of that feeble scientific reason that asserted the contrary. Christianity is the abasement of power. Try to produce the incorruptible, or the indecomposable, or the infrangible. The deviation of Hyperboreans. Stone, ice , the deep-frozen; in the cold place beyond death; the deafened man; Peter in the garden: As north and south, crystallization at the antipodes, at a maximum deviation from decay. The sirocco , the south wind, will unmake the crystallized, frozen stone; it remobilizes power; the elements dance haphazardly, go no matter where, without a yes , without a no, to the labyrinth of perilous admixture- towards reaction, equalized energies, decay.


  • A Call for Judgment: Sensible Finance for a Dynamic Economy!
  • Intercultural Couples: Crossing Boundaries, Negotiating Difference?
  • Addiction and Pregnancy: Empowering Recovery through Peer Counseling;
  • Nietzsche in Italy | Thomas Harrison - efycymepodor.tk!
  • Nematopogon.
  • Uncle Nicks Field Guide (A Few Common Delicious Plants of the Greater San Jose Area Book 1).

Two chemical states in opposition: The goal, in any case: The distillation, as is often the case, is effected by sublimation. The element retained is exceptionally small, almost nothing: It is straightforward science: Through pity the loss of force increases and multiplies. By way of confirmation, the amount thus lost is incommensurable - irrational ratios are, after all, ab surd - with the quantum of the cause. Hence its power of multiplication. At one go, all of the new sciences: The chemistry of corrupting reactions is ascribed, with all due exactitude, to conditioning physics on the one hand and to conditioned biochemistry on the other.

That life increases and power decreases. Etan and retombee, to use Bergson's terminology in which there are, precisely, two sources. People began to dream that the secret of the contradiction could well lie in biochemistry. The Antichrist 5 1 and to repeat the old language: Thus , the return of the old medicaments, the search for a purgative to eliminate microbes, the principles of sickness. Physics, chemistry, Darwinism, framed by Greek tragedy and medical practice.

The aphorism, at one blow, recovers the field of discourse. Evil is henceforth in the blood, multiplying itself and infecting the organism. Christianity has distilled and then extracted the malefic quasi nihil. The theologian has it in the blood; he is the vector of the infection's infection, he poisons the world. Nana the Golden Fly has the virus in her and she 'is the virus. German philosophy has a Protestant pastor for grandfather. Not the father, absent in passage, but the grandfather, as with Sartre.

The infection is transmitted genealogically, and from theologian to philosopher, in whom it becomes universalized as a concept - gaunt, pallid, pale. In universalizing itself it becomes cosmopolitan: The majority, half the earth. How it spreads and where it spreads. Here is the parasite, and the parasitology. On this point, reread La conquete de Plassans.

The microbe is anaerobic: Compare Buddhism , the positivist religion: Without hypocrisy it has discovered the medical, therapeutic reality of things. Listen to Ecce Homo: The impossibility of expunging uncleanliness, denominated in its religious context; as sin, within its medical context of dietetic hygiene. Conversely, Christianity prohibits the expulsion of filth - it closes the public baths. This evil must be designated and the transformations noted. The rock becomes dust; and blood, likened to alcohol, becomes sludge , slobber, poison, venom.

What makes these liquids dangerous are the parasites , worms, germs, pains infinitesimally small. This is said at once as metaphor and as positive discourse. Next, name the carrier, the vector: To be expelled , to be banished, driven from the table, cast into the desert to starve. It will be the terror of posterity, a place for raising venomous serpents.

For the serpent's resounding echo we must turn to chemistry- to the Pasteur Institute. From this, the rest can be deduced. Wagner is the indispensable scapegoat of all liberal Nietzscheans , j ust as Nietzsche is the indispensable scapegoat of all Wagnerites.

Curiously, the Nazis are the only ones who can b e simultaneously pro-Nietzsche and pro-Wagner. In the book entitled Nietzsche contra Wagner, Nietzsche republishes, with a few changes, many texts about Wagner that he wrote after his break with the musician. Nietzsche first says that, in his younger years, he approached the modem world full of hopes as well as illusions: I interpreted Wagner's music as an expression of a Dionysian power of the soul.

It is plain what I misunderstood in, equally plain what I read into , Wagner and Schopenhauer- myself. Then he continues with a statement of the basic opposition between the Dionysian and the Christian which is not explicitly named but is obviously meant: Every art, every philosophy, may he considered a remedy and aid in the service of either growing or declining life: But there are two kinds of sufferers: Wagner responds to this dual need of the latter no less than Schopenhauer: Conversely, those who suffer most and are poorest in life would need mildness, peacefulness, and goodness most- what is today called humaneness - in thought as well as in deed, and, if possible, a god that would be truly a god for the sick, a healer and "savior".

Nietzsche tells us that his passionate surrender to Wagner was a legitimate misunderstanding. He mistook one type of suffering for the other because, even though they are poles apart, antipodes, the two types of sufferers , Wagner and himself, are also very close,. It is understandable that a rather naive young man would mistake the one for the other. The confusion was permissible and it would be wrong to infer from it that Nietzsche ever sympathized with the Christian aspects of Wagner.

Thus , in the text I have just read Nietzsche acknowledges the presence of Christian elements in the early Wagner but he pretends that they were more or less hidden. This is disingenuous, to say the least. Many Christian elements remain somewhat covert in Wagner. A good example would be Brunehilde in The Valkyries. Walter Kaufmann New York: Viking Press, This is as quintessentially Christian as the intervention of Elizabeth to save Tannhauser when the knights form a violent circle around him. But there are also many Christian elements in the early Wagner that are quite explicit.

You do not need very good eyes to see them in Tannhauser, or in Lohengrin. Christian elements are everywhere in Wagner, even from the beginning. Nietzsche is not quite truthful in this version of his relationship with Wagner; yet there is another version that is even more. In this second version, he goes even further in distorting Wagner's e arly work. It is not enough for him to pretend that all Christian elements in Wagner were only implicit before Parsifal; he does not acknowledge their presence at all , and places the early Wagner squarely on the side of Pagan tragedy in the Nietzschean sense, on his side , the so-called Dionysian side.

Why would Nietzsche do that sort of thing? He is not happy with the interpretation of the Wagnerism that he gave in The Gay Science. The idea that he might have mistaken Christian suffering in any form for the tragic suffering that he espouses makes him look a little stupid, or it undermines the sharpness of the difference between the two. Perhaps he perceives the ambiguousness of the argument and thus invents the myth of an early Wagner who is one hundred percent D ionysian.

Nietzsche wants to exonerate himself from all blame in his relationship with Wagner. He never made a mistake. He wants to justify, from his so-called Dionysian standpoint, both his earlier admiration for and his later hostility to Wagner. It is the only work of Wagner that came after Nietzsche broke with his former idol. Nietzsche exaggerates the discrepancy between this last work and the earlier works.

According to this line of argument , Wagner made a complete about-face at the very moment when Nietzsche was reinforcing his long standing and unchanging opposition to everything Christian. Wagner is guilty of a form of apostasy. He abandoned his former ideals. The difference between these two versions of Nietzsche's critique of Wagner is that according to the first, there is no genuine tragic, pagan and Dionysian dimension even in the early Wagner.

Here is a text that corresponds to that second line of argument. It was first published in The Genealogy ofMorals. In Nietzsche contra Wagner Nietzsche gives it a more virulent ending: After all Parsifal is operetta material par excellence. Is Wagner's Parsifal his secretly superior laughter at himself, the triumph of his ultimate artistic freedom , his artistic non plus ultra - Wagner able to laugh at himself? Clearly, one should wish that; for what would Parsifal amount to if intended as a serious piece? Must we really see in it.

A curse on the senses and the spirit in a single hatred and breath? An apostasy and reversion to sickly Christian and obscurantist ideals?

Digital Dante

And not only in his art, but also in his life. We should remember how enthusiastically Wagner once followed in the footsteps of the philosopher Feuerbach. Nietzsche and Contradiction 57 Feuerbach's slogan of "healthy sensuality" sounded to Wagner, as to many other Germans. Had he learned differently in the end? For it seems, at least , that he finally had the will to teach differently.

Did the hatred against life become dominant in him, as in Flaubert? The preaching of chastity remains an incitement to anti-nature. PN The Antichrist versus Parsifal. Dionysus versus the Crucifie d. The two opposites are equivalent. As in a Hollywood movie , the ending reveals what you truly are. This is the fairy tale view of Nietzsche contra Wagner, the view that Nietzsche himself wanted us and himself to believe. The hard nucleus of the anti-Wagnerian stance is Parsifal. All the constantly quoted texts of Nietzsche on Parsifal are of the s ame ilk as this one, all extremely contemptuous, even insulting.

The same is true of most unpublished fragments. They keep harping in highly repetitive fashion upon the themes of the text I just read, sometimes in an even more abusive language. They all condemn what they call Wagner's sickening and senile surrender to the Christian God. This emphasis on Parsifal is certainly strategic in part- if this work is what Nietzsche says it is. H it is the only Christian work of Wagner , the younger Nietzsche can be absolved of any complicity with the Christian inspiration of Wagner. But this emphasis on Parsifal does not seem merely strategic. At times, his arguments sound rational and dispassionate but, at other times, his contempt becomes so excessive that it sounds more like hatred.

Any allusion to Parsifal arouses the strongest feelings in him. The force of his indignation is so convincing that it is taken at face value. Even the Nazis can concur this time. The idea that this remarkable consensus is an illusion and that it could be shattered must sound far-fetched at best. If I claim that it can be done, I will probably be suspected myself of surrendering my scholarly objectivity to my own religious prejudices. The official Nietzschean party line on Wagner and above all on Parsifal seems unchallengeable.

I have always felt, personally, that it can only be, at best, one half of the real story. A few years ago, I interpreted the Wagner-Nietzsche relation in terms of mimetic rivalry. Wagner is the god that Nietzsche would like to be. The history of the relationship corresponds marvelously to the successive stages of the mimetic process. First, Wagner is the explicitly acknowledged model, the openly worshipped divinity Nietzsche would like to be.

Later he becomes an obstacle and a rival without ceasing to be a model. The last Wagner is regarded as detestable and Nietzsche spends a lot of time proving his point, too much time to be fully convincing. Wagner remains the mode that Nietzsche desperately wants to repudiate. We hear only the voice that speaks against Wagner in Nietzsche. But there is another voice that speaks in favor of Wagner, and it must be speaking louder and louder at the end of Nietzsche's life, since the official voice is becoming louder and louder , as in an unsuccessful effort to silence the pro-Wagnerian voice.

In order to challenge the universal consensus on this subject, something quite sensational is required, some text that would reverse the habitual line on Parsifal. Nietzsche and Contradiction 59 It seems most unlikely that such a text can be found. If it existed , our great scholars would take it into account and the theoreticians would be more prudent in their treatment of Parsifal, of Wagner, and of Dionysus versus the Crucified.

When I wrote my first essays on Nietzsche, I never looked for the "smoking gun" as actively as I should have. I was not certain that such a text had ever been written. Unlike Dostoevsky, Nietzsche never succeeded in granting equal time to the other voice in himself. That is probably the reason the philosopher in him lost his mind and never became a novelist.

He says himself that, for a long time, it was difficult for him to distinguish in himselfwhat belonged to Wagner from what belonged to Friedrich Nietzsche. Writing, to him, was a means of achieving that distinction. Writing has a lot to do with the so-called will to power and very little with the underground confession Nietzsche enjoyed so much when he found it in Dostoevsky, but never practiced himself. My conviction was not weakened, but my argument was. I am glad to report that I have found the "smoking gun.

The power and rigor of the feeling. I am completely transported and moved - no painter ever managed to render as Wagner does a vision so indescribably melancholy and tender. His greatness in apprehending a dreadful certainty, from which something like compassion emanates: No artist has ever been able to express as magnificently as Wagner does such a somber and melancholy vision. Not even Dante, not even Leonardo. As if, after many years, someone finally addressed the problems that truly concern me, not to echo once again the answers that I always have ready at hand, but to provide the Christian answers, which have been the answers of souls stronger than those produced by the last two centuries.

It contradicts everything the late Nietzsche ordinarily says regarding not only Parsifal and Wagner but, above all the will to power, ressentiment and Christianity, everything that seems unquestionable in the creed of the late Nietzsche. I hope that whose who praise Nietzsche's talent for self-contradiction will be eager to tackle that text.

It is a good occasion for them to show that they do not praise contradiction only in the abstract. Of all the works of Wagner, I repeat, Parsifal is the one Nietzsche most consistently and most vehemently despised. Not long before and not long after writing this text, in the same series of fragments, Nietzsche wrote about Parsifal and Christianity in full conformity with his standard ideology.

Parsifal is denounced as the final degradation of Wagner, the shameful offspring of his senility. This reversal of everything we heard in Nietzsche contra Wagner is so neat, clean and perfect that it seems impossible for the same writer to write this and to write as Nietzsche ordinarily does on the same subjects; yet, at the same time, it is also impossible that it would not be the same writer. There are many things that connect the text I just read with its countless Verneinungen in the published writings.

Nietzsche and Contradiction 6 1 on the weirdness o f its doctrine, b y saying i n fact, "You do not have to worry; it's not really Catholic, it is not even really Christian. Not even Wagner's shrillest denunciations of Catholicism could clear Wagner, in Nietzsche's eyes, of the suspicion that he was a traitor. A traitor to what? A traitor to everything that Nietzsche claimed Wagner as well as himself stood for in their long conversations at Tribschen. The only traitor to the Dionysian is Nietzsche himself, at least the Nietzsche of this piece, traitor to his own system. A few pages earlier, Nietzsche says: Our unorthodox text may be defined, from the standpoint of the previous one, as a relapse into the former confusion.

Like Wagner himself, he is possessed by Parsifal. Here, as elsewhere, when Nietzsche praises Parsifal, he praises the prelude. If you are familiar with the ordinary imprecations against Parsifal in and of Wagner, which are quite repetitious, an exception is often made in favor of the prelude. Nietzsche always acknowledged that he enjoyed the prelude. But habitually he goes no further. He confesses that he likes the music insofar as it can be separated from the words and the hateful message he heard in these words.

Two questions must be answered. The answer is simple. They don't know it exists. Nietzsche's sister did not include it in The Will to Power. Thanks to this absence, all Nietzscheans can go on believing that, ambivalent as Nietzsche may be regarding Richard Wagner, the man, he is unwavering in his contempt for Parsifal and above all Christianity itself.

If his sister had published this piece in The Will to Power, it would have been quite shocking. Many questions would have become unavoidable that the Nietzscheans have always managed to avoid. Was Nietzsche already a little insane when he wrote this piece, or was he a little insane when he was writing the other way?

Her purpose was to promote the philosophy of her brother, not to undermine it. She had to eliminate this piece. But she nevertheless published it. According to my new French edition, she published it as a personal letter from her brother to herself. This was a stroke of genius, really.

She herself was not hostile to Wagner , of course; she deplored the attitude of her brother. She was eager, therefore, to publicize any favorable opinion that Nietzsche might have entertained toward Wagner and his work. Wagner lovers could think that Nietzsche's true sentiments were those he reserved for his sister. The enemies of the sister could say the opposite, and claim that Nietzsche must have been lying because he despised Elizabeth. In the near future, I suppose, some orthodox Nietzschean may try to prove that this text really is a letter to the sister and therefore should be entirely discounted as an expression of what Nietzsche really thought.

Nietzsche's sister, I feel , has been quite useful to everybody, even to the contemporary Nietzscheans who systematically minimize the importance of the religious problematic of the late Nietzsche. In a sense, of course , it is obvious. In our text, Nietzsche defines the Christian feeling par excellence as a compassion which is always rejected elsewhere as an imposture and a transparent disguise of ressentiment or the "reactive will to power.

Certainly not, or rather, we can see here how different from a psychological or even a psychoanalytical reduction the mimetic perspective really is. The pro- and anti-Parsifal oscillation involves more than Nietzsche's personal relationship to Wagner, it involves the number-one N ietzschean question, which is the difference between the Dionysian and the Christian.

To me the question of the will to power, active , and reactive, is really subordinate to that question. In order to understand this question, we must read a final text , o n the background of the texts in which Nietzsche speaks explicitly about the original drama of Dionysus versus the Crucified. It is the s ame collective death and the last thing Nietzsche considers on this identity. There is no sacrificial religion without a drama at the center, and the more closely you observe it, the more you discover that the features common to the death of Dionysus and Jesus are also common to other cults in the entire world.

To say that Dionysus stands for some kind of non-biblical monotheism , as Heidegger claims, is complete nonsense in my view. They saw that the facts are the same and, being positivists , they immediately assumed that all these religions were equivalent. Every great book of anthropology of the age tries to demonstrate that J udaism and Christianity are the same as any other religion with a sacrificial origin. He knew that the "facts" were important but that they meant nothing until they were interpreted.

Dionysus versus the Crucified: In the case of Dionysus , the emphasis lies on the innocence of the murderers and, secondarily, of the guilt of the victim , even of God himself. In the case of Jesus, the emphasis lies on the innocence of the victim and therefore on the guilt of his murderers. Here once again we have the two types of suffering. The p agan type affirms even the harshest suffering, as Nietzsche puts it, meaning the cruelest violence, whereas the passion identifies with the victims and denounces the other type of religion as a lie.

Nietzsche saw clearly that ] esus died not as a sacrificial victim of the Dionysian type, but against all such sacrifices. That is why Nietzsche accused the whole Christian presentation of being a hidden act of ressentiment: The Christian passion is a slander on paganism. It sees the old religious violence in a negative light and it makes its perpetrators feel guilty for committing it, even for assenting to it. Since all human culture is grounded in this collective violence , the whole human race is declared guilty of the murder of God.

Life itself is slandered because it cannot organize and perpetuate itself without this type of violence. Contrary to Heidegger, I do not regard the will to power per se as the central thought of Nietzsche. The will to power acquires its significance through the difference between Dionysus and the Crucified, which is the difference between Nietzsche and Wagner, and the plunge into madness is the final confusion of that difference , the shift from Dionysus versus the Crucified to Dionysus and the Crucified.

When this difference collapses, Nietzsche goes mad. Nietzsche and Contradiction 65 This final confusion is not something that overcomes Nietzsche from outside and has nothing to do with his previous intellectual life. The presence of even one single pro-Parsifal and pro-compassion fragment confirms that Nietzsche's intellectual life is like a pendulum that oscillates madly not only between Wagner and Nietzsche but between Dionysus and the Crucified.

The function of the writer in Nietzsche is to convince himself and us that the opposite opinions from the pro-Parsifal ones are the only ones that enter his mind. The written record of even one single swing to the other extremity of the dial is crucial to the interpretation of Nietzsche.

The text we have read throws light on the genesis of the final breakdown which is not as unrelated to the intellectual and spiritual life of the writer as most Nietzscheans would have us believe. Any future reading of Nietzsche, it seems to me , must be able to account for the contradiction that we found in Nietzsche's judgment of Parsifal.

The Life of Henry Brulard Stendhal's autobiography. This Italian painting is Raphael's Transfiguration: Random House, 1 A paradigm of the naive work of art, an appearance of appearance, Raphael's painting, in its representation and composition, returns in Nietzsche's text precisely forty years after having already appeared as absent, as the irresistible and fortuitous association of its name to the number 50, on the sixteenth of October, 2 , at San Pietro in Montorio on Mount Janicolo in Rome. It comes back in Daybreak, but to let break out through itself a new transfiguration, which Raphael could have envisioned- if he were now alive- beyond the contemplation of the work n.

I saw the Trans. This is no longer how we see the world - and Raphael too would no longer be able to see it as he did: In reality, I would be embarassed to say. Dionysus, a name which is also an ultimate contradiction, Dionysus versus the Crucified. It is precisely this contradiction that Raphael had represented in his last painting, the Trans.

And it is by the Trans. This painting was placed by the Cardinal at San Pietro in Montorio above the grand altar and was always admired for the quality of its execution. With the death of this admirable artist it is quite possible that painting itself died because when he closed his eyes, she became blind. The painting itself and its subject would be the representation , or to speak like Nietzsche, the analoges Gleichnis, the analogical symbol and substitute, of this resurrection.

Echoing Vasari and Raphael, here are a few sentences from Ecce Homo that might be put in the mouth of the painter, or better, in the mouth of the appearance of appearance above the painter's dead body: Modello for the Transfiguration. I looked back, I looked forward, and never saw so many and such good things at once. And Nietzsche added that Stendhalian sentence, "and so I tell life to myself. The Transfiguration , a painting interrupted by Raphael's death and perhaps taken up by Giulio Romano, is a painting also interrupted and taken up again by Raphael himself.

Spatial syntax is interrupted by spacings which representation, being representation, takes up again and erases. It is the syncopation of a plastic song, of a visual music where an end is heard at the same time that a beginning takes place, in order to produce for the eye an effect of rhythm, an intensification of presence and absence.

Nocturnal zigzagging marks the canvas twice. As you can see, only the upper part of the painting is named by the title Transfiguration. This is the part which Raphael decided to syncopate we shall see at what price , which he decided to link, in the musical sense of the term, through the local and temporal unity of action, to the scene of the possessed son who , when Jesus was on Mount Tabor, was brought to the Apostles, who in their lack of faith refused to cure him miraculously. Transfiguration 73 Let us take a look at the admirable preparatory drawing in order to read the syncopation.

In the middle of a crowd of angelic figures , the Celestial Father is just above his beloved Son under the vault of his mantle. Firmly footed on earth, the Son stands at the summit of the mountain. The Apostles are kneeling and Moses and Elijah are barely discernible in the grisaille. Here again there are two orders, that of the Father and that of the Son. The text of the transfiguration ends: Listen and obey him. The syncopation chosen by Raphael is now put into relief by the drawing as the trace of an absence.

Only the gaze of the Son, a gaze with no object in the painting, designates Him outside the frame. It is as if, thanks to this sublime flight to the very vanishing of all possible presentation, another father would be able to enter the scene from below, the terrestial father holding another son, the possessed one: This vision is not one that would be had by the figures of the lower part; it is our vision as spectators of the painting, the vision of dream, the appearance of appearance. From this mere appearance arises, like ambrosial vapor, a new visionary world of mere appearances , invisible to those wrapped in the first appearance- a radiant floating in purest bliss , a serene contemplation beaming from wide-open eyes.

Inasmuch as it partakes in art, the tragic myth fully partakes in this metaphysical transfiguration that constitutes pure art in general. The possessed son remains once more the mirror image of the eternal originary pain. Perhaps we have to wait for Daybreak, or simply for the satyric chorus in The Birth of Tragedy, in order to read that figure as the drunken and mad young companion of Dionysus, the messenger of a wisdom springing from the depths of Nature.

Yes, we have to wait for Daybreak and perhaps even later, if not too late, perhaps always too late, in order to understand "Have I been understood? Have I been understood well? It was a magnificent sunny day. A light, barely noticeable sirocco breeze made a few white clouds float. I was happy to live. Transfiguration 75 Memoirs ef a Tourist and the history of the City, appears the phantom of the Eternal City, between the quest for the past in present ruin or the return of the present through the writing of history from the origin, a fantastic City in this locus of the Stendhalian text: Everything is reserved, and to make them appear, one only has to shift perspective.

Inimaginable time, a time of happiness where time-order disappears in becoming what one is. Transparent, luminous space, morning space and not noon space, the space of autumn, October, 2. But this emblematic and figural image is invisible and absent in San Pietro. There is only its name. The painting was here but is now there, "buried in the depths of the Vatican, in the sad gallery of gray marble.

Because it has this name, because it treats this subject and displaces it by the supplement of a second son , Raphael's painting would be the fiction typically and singularly modelling Stendhal's life. By the same token, the contemplation of the painting gives rise to the place of the "auto-bio-thanato-graphical" enunciation. The same goes for Nietzsche, but inversely. We read in Aubenque's Le Probleme de l'etre chez Aristote this definition of essence: This dual descent, as it were, both from the highest and the lowest rung on the ladder of life, at the same time a decadent and a beginning- this, if anything, explains that neutrality, that freedom from all partiality in relation to the total problem of life, that perhaps distinguishes me" Ecce It seems that with this summit and this bottom of the scale of life , Nietzsche describes the composition and distribution of Raphael's Transfiguration.

Text of the origin, origin of the text, originary text-image, I said at the beginning. Reading Nietzsche and Stendhal, it seems in effect that in the work of Raphael, in its image and name, the origin is at stake in a chiasmus of whose structure the painting is almost a figure, a chiasmus whose branches both Nietzsche and Stendhal follow in an inverse way but with the same objective. Stendhal's reading of the painting emphasizes the presence of the Mother in her incestuous look. The mother is the sign and the erotic figure of the infinite gap separating the two sons, the transfigured and the disfigured one.

He is transfigured he, the disfigured in order that, immersed in that appearance of appearance, in his contemplation , he might find calm and rest. To be one's own father in his death but also his contrary, certainly not the mother unspeakable horror , but a woman like Cosima Wagner, Nietzsche explains in Ecce Homo.

Stendhal would answer to Nietzsche: Habermas on Nietzsche "Return to Myth. Its evaluative force derives from its status as an illocutionary amalgam, part accusation, part warning: His essay is emblazoned with the asseveration: However, a second reading of the slogan is also possible, and with rather interesting results. Subsequent references to this book will be given parenthetically in the text. The reader can decide whether the paraphrase is just.

Isn't the tool that is here being used to condemn the mythic itself of the nature of myth? Paradoxically, the accusation levelled against the mythic itself relies on myth, evoking what it banishes, preserving what it negates. Freud's term for such semiotic moves was Verneinung. Habermas's reading of Nietzsche is a massive denegation in the technical psychoanalytic sense. For this reason it would be insufficient merely to collect the philological howlers that dot Habermas's text. To cite, for instance , in a gesture of disproof Nietzsche's sentence: Only at this level can we discover something interesting about the otherwise tiresome postmodernism debate.

For it is this debate which is the immediate context of Habermas's critique of Nietzsche ; question reads: Dreimal ist dieser Versuch, den Vernunftbegriff auf das Programm einer in sich dialektischen Aufklarung zuzuschneiden, misslungen. Mit Nietzsche verzichtet die Kritik der Moderne zum ersten Mal auf die Einbehaltung ihres emanzipatorischen Gehaltes" 1 1 7.

Another version of this alleged regression appears in the following formulation: Nietzsche beniitzt die Leiter der historischen Vernunft, um sie am Ende wegzuwerfen und im Mythos, als dem Anderen der Verunft , Fuss zu fassen" 1 Kritische Studienausgabe in 15 Banden, ed. Giorgio Colli and Mazzino Montinari Munich: Deutscher Taschenbuch Verlag, VI , 1 Subsequent references to this edition are indicated parenthetically within the text, citing volume and page. It is interesting to note that the passage quoted here carries the heading: Nietzsche- Art - Postmodernism 79 the text of Nietzsche is, according to the spatio-mechanical metaphor of the essay's title , the "Drehscheibe" that casts thought off its right track and into its aberrant postmodern phase.

The simple citation of Habermas's thesis: Nietzsche takes leave of modernity, teaches us this about the postmodernism debate: For this thesis , resting as it does on a mythic figure, cannot possibly be disproven, and this because it is not an epistemic statement but rather a symbolic statement in the precise sense that Dan Sperber has given to that term. Now, the symbolic system Habermas represents, and with which he attempts to appropriate Nietzsche, is called Geschichtsphilosophie, a discourse which has a specific genealogy beginning in the eighteenth century, and which is anchored in a specific institutional situation of the intellectual.

I have argued elsewhere that this situation is that of the university professor - especially the philosophy professor- in the world of post-H umboldtian universal education, but I don't want to insist on this institutional reading here. Nietzsche, la question de! Union Generale D'Editions, Of course, this two-state model is complexly ramified in Habermas's text, but I shall ignore its details here in order to focus on what seems to me the decisive issue: Hence the importance of Kant, the first philosopher of modernity.

In Kant, reason gives itself its own laws- auto nomos- and this is nothing other than the definition of freedom. The figure of emancipation organizes a teleological narrative in which a protagonist - here: The significance of this structure becomes dear when we recall that, from the projected thesis of 1 across the second Unzeitgemasse Betrachtung to the articulation of the thought of eternal return, Nietzsche's work undertakes a sustained critique of this teleological narrative symbolism.

Convivio (Italian) – Digital Dante

For Nietzsche, teleology is telepathy: I refer to chapters of the third treatise of the Genealogie der Moral. Nietzsche does not deny the massive 6 See Jacques Derrida, Eperons. Les styles de Nietzsche Paris: Nietzsche -Art - Postmodernism 81 effects - the brute historical reality- of this change. Man komme mir nicht mit der Wissenschaft, wenn ich nach dem natiirlichen Antagonisten des asketischen Ideals suche ,.

Science does not emerge out of religion as out of its other, but rather m aintains the principle of religious symbolism in and through an act which negates the outworks , the particular symbolic masks of that system. We are dealing here, in other words, with a model in which the self-negation of a particular symbolic organization of life - the ascetic ideal - results in an aggrandizement of the system's strength, complexity, scope and refinement.

The modern perpetuates the dominance of the ascetic ideal precisely to the degree that it redoubles its foundational gesture: This critique is directed at the logic of self-negation itself, at the cutting of a wound, that implantation of a poison , with which the ascetic priest maintains life over and against its decadent tendencies. That is , the priest turns the will against itself, constitutes will as the splitting of willing from itself, 7 an operation that rests on the premise: The moralizing turn of life against itself, in other words, is plagued by an immanent nihilism: Thus, the Copernican turn, which initiates our modernity, recapitulates the negative reversal performed by the ascetic priest, intensifying and rendering explicit the nihilism implicit in the ascetic ideal.

But the reason for this indigestibility is not simply that Nietzsche offers an alternative 7 Cf. Uberlegungen zum hermeneutischen lmperativ bei Kant und Nietzsche,'' in Sprache und Gleichnis. Hiibener Wiirzburg, The entire problem of constitutive self-negation, which I allude to in this paragraph , receives its most penetrating interpretation to date in Hamacher's essay. Nietzsche -Art - Postmodernism 83 to Habermas's teleological narrative symbolism; it is , rather, that Nietzsche's analysis includes a critical account of the emergence of that symbolism.

This organization of desire in terms of a distant goal, this interpretation of life as on the way to a truth that beckons in the distance, is precisely the achievement of the ascetic priest. Das asketische Ideal hat ein Ziel, dasselbe ist allgemein genug, class - alle Interessen des menschlichen Daseins sonst , an ihm gemessen, kleinlich und eng erscheinen ; es legt sich Zeiten, Volker, Menschen unerbittlich auf dieses Eine Ziel hin aus , es lasst keine andere Auslegung, kein anderes Ziel gelten , es verwirft, verneint, bejaht, bestatigt allein im Sinne seiner Interpretation - und gab es je ein zu Ende gedachteres System von Interpretation?

V, "Randomness deprived of its innocence," - this is how Nietzsche interprets the self-negating movement of moralization VI, 1 Zur Sernantik geschichtlicher Zeiten Frankfurt: Suhrkamp, 1 1 1 7 5. An alternative model is elaborated by Michel de Certeau in an extremely rich essay influenced by Foucault, and in particular by Foucault's reading of Nietzsche. Nietzsche inthronisiert ja den Geschmack. Aber er kann die zuri. Apparently one has experiences of something called modern art and these spontaneously generate a body of thought. This same geneticism appears in another statement, in which the sponsoring experience is diluted to a vague contemporaneity: Nietzsche's work seems to be the product of a Zeitgeist.

The simplistic geistesgeschichtliche method of interpretation serves here merely as a device to introduce into the text a certain phantasm , and once again the phantasm appears in the context of a denegation. The Traps of Narrative," in On Signs, ed. TheJohns Hopkins University Press, Nietzsche explicitly repudiates l'art pour l'art.

H abermas denies in order to maintain what he denies. The denial itself is prompted by a fascination for that which it casts away. To put this another way: It functions merely as an evocative figure calling forth a vague Other, the speculcir counterpart to "reason. However little this statement tells us about N ietzsche's view of art, it does tell us something about Habermas's cloudy conception. As a reader of modern art, he bears some similarity to Madame Bovary, who , Flaubert tells us , loved "lurid books full of orgiastic scenes and bloody deeds.

Often she would be seized by terror, she would cry out. Moralization takes place through the hypostasis of an Other: Possible, que j'aie eu tant d'esprit? It is an attitude which is not untypical of a certain academic discourse on modernism. In the second section of this paper I want to inquire into the strategies of such a discourse. Nietzsche's Critical Discourse What is the structure, status and positionality of Nietzsche's discourse on art? We can begin to answer this question by considering the view on it that Habermas attributes to Nietzsche. If these statements ring familiar, it is because they are redactions of classical philosophical propositions: Reason is the unity of the Beautiful, the Good, and the True.

Habermas is correct in suggesting that Nietzsche did not accept this proposition. But Nietzsche's rejection o f the classical philosophical thesis does not entail, as Habermas further suggests, that the discourse on art disengages itself totally from the discourses of morality and knowledge. It is from Bersani that I borrow the example of Madame Bovary.

N ietzsche's critical practice, far from purifying the discourse on art by isolating it, complexifies that discourse by articulating a network o f relationships between the domains of art, morals, and knowledge. Much could be said regarding the question of whether the notion of discursive plurality that Nietzsche posits is to be preferred to the Habermasian view of discursive homogeneity.

Certainly this is one of the serious issues underlying the postmodemism debate. However, I do not want to argue the case here: Instead , I want to see how this notion of discursive plurality communicates with other aspects of Nietzsche's thought and writing. In particular I am thinking of Nietzsche's use of the concept of taste.

H abermas, of course , misconstrues this notion altogether, for when he criticizes Nietzsche for enthroning taste he has in mind a notion of taste as a faculty for discerning aesthetic value. To see how this doctrine is articulated with the question of discourse, let us consider the relationship between, so to speak, a specific "act of taste" and the aesthetic discourse that Nietzsche develops around it.

Such an "act" is recounted in the following fragment: Die Energie der Gesundheit verrath sich bei Kranken in dem brusken Widerstande gegen die krankmachenden Elemente. The locus of this act is the body- a sick body, in which tendencies of health and aggravated illness interact. Taste has its emergence not within a psychological faculty of apprehension, but rather within the complexly layered corporeal field. This does not mean that the discourse on art becomes a subdivision of biology. It is this plurality of values, verbal constructs , and moralities within which the act of taste emerges, and the discourse which analyzes this act is therefore itself necessarily plural.

Precisely this implication of Nietzsche's corporeal concept of taste becomes apparent if we take a step further in our fictional genesis story of Der Fall Wagner and move from the initial brusque gesture to a later stage of processing. One of the sketches for Der Fall Wagner looks like this: X - schmerzhaft-nachdenklich 1. Bizet's Musik- der Philosoph ironisch 2. Nietzsche - Art - Postmodernism 89 Within this network a set of "takes" on the phenomenon "Wagner" is correlated with a system of what might be called discursive attitudes or tonalities , the terms for which e.

In other words, Nietzsche pluralizes the possibilities of subjectivity by allowing the enunciating subject to take up a range of attitudinal positions. His writing explodes the myth of attitudinal neutrality; the myth of the "theoreticaL subject," which Habermas, among 'others , stylistically or style-lessly 15 perpetuates. But these discursive tonalities are not deployed randomly; their ordering clearly exhibits the contours of a strategy. The conflict legible in such strategic deployments is precisely that conflict of"values, words and moralities" within which the act of taste emerges.

In this regard, note especially the scriptural gesturality of 5 , where the attitudinal m arker is doubled, assuming a position within the thematic sub-space of the page so that only the narrow grapheme of a hyphen or dash 1 4 One might think of these "voice" markers in terms of Canetti's beautiful notion of "acoustic masks," a notion especially attractive here because it allows us to think of Nietzsche's own practice of writing in connection with his important theory of the mask.

The hyphen at once joins and opposes, it is weapon and apotropaic shield, and as such it is the asemantic basis of a criticism which forms itself as a labor of differentiation. It is no accident that Nietzsche himself stressed the importance for aesthetics of a theory of punctuation. Later, he will use the metaphor of a resolute surgical "Einschnitt" to characterize his own critical practice in Der Fall Wagner as the bringing to light of an inner valuational conflict.

This cut, however, is already operative in the hyphen's strike; it runs through the text itself. E ach lexie condenses a semantic juxtaposition i n which various vocabularies or codes what I am calling registers interact with and interpret one another.

Whenever such emblematic animals appear in Nietzsche's work, they knot together multiple strands of sense. In this way, the term reverberates with that dimension of Nietzsche's critique which we might call his mass psychology. Nietzsche-Art - Postmodernism 91 that Der Fall Wagner i s a critique o f fascist culture avant la lettre, an argument which could be supported through a reading of the text' s technical-medial terminology, for instance, the discussion of Wagner's amplificational and magnificational practices. In the art of Wagner, the disintegration of political institutions is compensated for by an hallucination which collects the atomized elements into an imaginary totality.

Benjamin will later call this process, perhaps overhastily, the aesthetization of politics. In fact, the true object of the essay is not Wagner the individual, but a species of organic agitation , a syndrome or type of sickness. Thus, against the biographism of the Dilthey school and Habermas, Nietzsche operates a strategic displacement of the proper name, the marker of biographical identity: Ist er nicht eher eine Krankheit?

What spreads in decadence is a certain disorganization, analogous , I think, to what information theorists call noise. Decadence designates the disgregation of meaning structures, a break-down of overriding m acro-forms of interpretation. W omit kennzeichnet sich jede litterarische decadence? Damit, class das Leben nicht mehr im ganzen wohnt. Aber das ist das Gleichnis fiir jeden Stil der decadence: It is through this phantasm that Wagner rules: To say that Wagner is a "Krankheit" is to say that his art is a phantasma-machine that has as its function the organization of bodies.

Wrapped in its coils we discover precisely that theme of the body which has guided our reading of the entire fictional genesis of Der Fall Wagner: Nietzsche's discourse, in other words, embodies, in a rich sense of that term, the very patterns of strife it analyzes, - whence its polyvalence and perspectival refraction. Nietzsche replaces the juridical standpoint of critical discourse with a combination of enactment and interpretation that moves within the complex network of energies and organizational forms that - "wider Wissen, wider Willen" - we are.

And indeed, Nietzsche's sentence: In the final section of this paper, I want to take a closer look at the notion of art that emerges from Nietzsche's later writings. Nietzsche on Art I begin by circling back to the rattlesnake of Der Fall Wagner, which attaches to a semantic register as yet unmentioned. In other words, the phenomenon that here carries the name "Wagner" is being read against the Nietzschean archetype of moralization.

The most fully developed account of this Typus, as I remarked in section I, unfolds across the third treatise of the Genealogie, the vocabulary of which, not accidentally, reverberates throughout the Wagner essay. Nietzsche -A rt - Postmodernism 93 the occupation of the aesthetic by morality: This return of the ascetic priest in Wagner, or rather Wagner's repetition of what I would call the ascetic gesture, takes us to the nerve of Nietzsche's theory of art. As I remarked earlier, the act performed by the ascetic priest consists in a movement of reflexive negation, the implanting of a poison, the inscription of a Nein which organizes the energies of the body.

It is therefore simultaneously a corporeal and a symbolic event, or rather: What terms can be used to conceptualize such an affirmative, call it Dionysian, art? These questions shall serve as the itinerary for the remainder of my reading. A general definition of moralization from the Genealogie offers itself as a useful point of departure: The narrative mise-en-scene of this Erlosung occurs in chapter four, in a fictional account of the Ring's genesis.

Siegfried embodies this transgressive energy, indeed his very origin is a violation of the primordial contract: Such is the starting point of Nietzsche's narrative: Siegfried is replaced in the role of narrative subject by Wagner himself and the scenic figuration is transferred to a navigational register. Now the narrative crisis and its resolution can unfold: Wagner's Schiff lief lange Zeit lustig auf dieser Bahn. Kein Zweifel, Wagner suchte auf ihr sein hochstes Ziel. Das Schiff fuhr auf ein Riff; Wagner sass fest.

VI , 20 The path of Lust, of the "ersten Impuls," cannot be followed out to its end. An accident befalls the ship, a contrariety emerges to hold it in check: What will be the solution to this desperate situation?

Menu di navigazione

Er besann sich lange, seine Lage schien verzweifelt. Hier zu scheitern- das war auch ein Ziel. Alles Iauft schief, Alles geht zu Grunde, die neue Welt ist so schlimm wie die alte: Allen Ernstes , dies war eine Erlosung.