Nietzsche as a Scholar of Antiquity (Bloomsbury Studies in Continental Philosophy)
Format: PDF / Kindle (mobi) / ePub
Typically, the first decade of Friedrich Nietzsche's career is considered a sort of précis to his mature thinking. Yet his philological articles, lectures, and notebooks on Ancient Greek culture and thought - much of which has received insufficient scholarly attention - were never intended to serve as a preparatory ground to future thought. Nietzsche's early scholarship was intended to express his insights into the character of antiquity. Many of those insights are not only important for better understanding Nietzsche; they remain vital for understanding antiquity today.
Interdisciplinary in scope and international in perspective, this volume investigates Nietzsche as a scholar of antiquity, offering the first thorough examination of his articles, lectures, notebooks on Ancient Greek culture and thought in English. With eleven original chapters by some of the leading Nietzsche scholars and classicists from around the world and with reproductions of two definitive essays, this book analyzes Nietzsche's scholarly methods and aims, his understanding of antiquity, and his influence on the history of classical studies.
literature consisted in: was it conceived as a sort of aesthetic judgment?—or maybe an ethical judgment? In the case of ancient scholars and literates it seems that the first form of historical-literary consideration was related to two contrary purposes: encomium or condemnation, both of which are related to the internal dynamics of Greek society (political and value judgments on the contents of the work). But the main character of each history of literature always brings attention to what is
Nietzsche’s contemporary lecture. In The Birth of Tragedy, Dionysus is associated with “a longing anticipation of a metaphysical world” (BT 10; KSA 1, 74) and a Beyond (“Jenseits”, 7; KSA 1, 57). “The eternal phenomenon of Dionysian art [...] gives expression to the will in its omnipotence, as it were, behind the principium individuationis, the eternal life beyond all phenomena and despite annihilation” (16; KSA 1, 108). The language may be Schopenhauerian and Kantian, but we should not be misled
authors but did not have time for a more precise collation. Despite this insight into the collage-character of the lecture, they sold the entire parcel as “Friedrich Nietzsche: Rhetoric and Language” to great interest, amplifying with this weighty name the movement of rhetorical Deconstruction that had been causing such sensation since the 1970s. As is well known, this led quickly to an intensive engagement with the lectures and related texts. A more exact clarification of the source texts was
later than the fairly worked-out notions of the Dionysian and the Socratic, including the account of the death of tragedy by way of the Socratic. This delay reveals a story about the role of Apollo in The Birth of Tragedy, such that Nietzsche is for the first time able to give a general account of the dynamics of cultural development. Second, that one of the most important new philosophical vistas opened up by the role of the Apollonian in the full theory of tragedy is the notion of a genuine
perfected, ennobled: because originally it was a base and unprepossessing drive, related to stubbornness, disobedience and envy. To be hostile against this drive towards an ideal of one’s own: that used to be the law of every morality. There was only one norm: “man”—and every people believed in possessing this one and last norm. But above and outside oneself, in a faraway supra-world, one was permitted in viewing a multiplicity of norms: one god was not the denial and heresy of another god! Here