See the essay “Freund und die Zukunft” in Gesammelte Werke in Zwölf Bänden (Frankfurt: Fischer, 1960), IX, 492.įor a comparative analysis of the use of the paradox as a stylistic feature in both the Gospels and Zarathustra see Karl Groos, “Der paradoxe Stil in Nietzsches ‘Zarathustra’,” Zeitschrift für angewandte Psychologie, 7 (1913), 467–529. 235, suggests that ambivalences are mostly unconscious: “Ambivalence means, of course, that an act, which is seemingly guided by one conscious emotion is, at the same time, unconsciously co-determined by the opposite emotion: an act of love by hate, an act of kindness by vindictiveness.”Įrnst Nündel, “Thomas Manns Kunstanschauungen in seinen Essays, Reden und Miszellen,” unpubl. Zarathustra's love is thus a perfect example of “conscious” ambivalence. Murphy (Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, 1968), II, 23–24. 104–112.įor the outline of the Gospel of Mark I am indebted to The Jerome Biblical Commentary, ed. Johannes Klein, Die Dichtung Nietzsches, pp. My interpretation thus differs from theirs in that I see Zarathustra as the very embodiment of this synthesis, whereby it must be borne in mind that Zarathustra is not the overman. The principal difference is that Kaufmann connects this phrase with the overman, whereas Jaspers does not, at least not explicitly. Being capable of both sympathy and hardness, of loving and ruling, not using claws though having them … Strictly speaking, Jaspers’ and Kaufmann's interpretations are not mutually exclusive. 514, Kaufmann summarizes the difference between his own interpretation of “The Roman Caesar with Christ's soul” and that of Jaspers as follows: “In a nutshell: for Jaspers this phrase represents one of ‘the most amazing attempts to bring together again into a higher unity what Nietzsche has first separated and opposed to each other … Nietzsche imagines-without any power of vision and unrealizably-the synthesis of the ultimate opposition.’ For me the same phrase represents ‘the very heart of Nietzsche's vision of the overman. In his edition of Nietzsche's The Will to Power (New York: Random House, 1967), p. 6–8.įriedrich Nietzsche, Gesammelte Weihe (München: Musarion, 1925), XIV, 20. For a discussion of the concept of self-identification in a mythopoeic sense see my Portrait of the Artist as Hermes (Chapel Hill: Univ. Kaufmann also seems to equate “self-identification” with “identicalness,” which does not recommend itself from either a mythopoeic or a psychoanalytical point of view. Even if it were to be conceded that Nietzsche's sympathies may ultimately have been with Goethe and Socrates or with “Dionysos versus the Crucified,“-and there are, admittedly, good reasons for doing so-this still would not preclude the possibility of Nietzsche's wavering identification with certain facets of a projected image of Jesus.
Instead, it sees Nietzsche as a consistent and unambiguous thinker, a point which is surely debatable. Kaufmann's argument makes no allowance for the psychological realities of ambivalence. His position is that Nietzsche identified with Goethe and Socrates rather than with Jesus. 271–273, argues that Jaspers’ conclusions about Nietzsche's ambiguous attitude toward Jesus as well as his self-identification with Jesus are unwarranted.
Walter Kaufmann, “Jaspers’ Relation to Nietzsche'’ in From Shakespeare to Existentialism (Boston: Beacon Press, 1959), pp. XIV of Collected Works (New York: Pantheon, 1963), p. The expression is borrowed from Kaufmann, Nietzsche, p. Philosopher, Psychologist, Antichrist, 3rd ed. Karl Jaspers, Nietzsche und das Christentum (München: Piper, 1963), pp. Klein's book still recommends itself on the strength of its structural analysis of Zarathustra. 112, which sees parody as a means of underscoring the contrast between the old gospel and the new. Equally vague and unqualified is the interpretation of Johannes Klein, Die Dichtung Nietzsches (München: Beck, 1936), p. Aside from such simplistic explanations, Martini's stylistic analysis is a tour de force. 33–34, interprets Nietzsche's use of parody in Zarathustra as a device for defeating Christianity with its own weapons. All references to Nietzsche's works are based on this edition except when otherwise indicated.įritz Martini, Das Wagnis der Sprache (Stuttgart: Klett, 1954), pp. Friedrich Nietzsche, Werke in drei Bänden, ed.
0 kommentar(er)
