Greg Bartram

The Birth of Tragedy

 

 

Nietzsche writes feverishly about the arts in his writing The Birth of Tragedy. The writing is difficult to follow as it is littered with all sorts of references to Greek mythology and persons of great accomplishment from the past.  However difficult it may be to read, the passion with which this work was written is evident as Nietzsche pounds home his arguments.

 

The main point of discussion begins with the separation of art into two branches: Apolline and Dionysiac.  Both Apollo and Dionysus protect different aspects of art for the Greeks and Herr Nietzsche.  In this text, the term Apolline associates with the visual arts while Dionysiac  relates to music and later, tragic myth.  Nietzsche talks about each in great length and includes many sources from Euripides, Socrates, Sophoclese and other Greek as well as German artists.  Comparisons between the types of art show that neither is greater than the other but that they complement each other.  He also maintains that at certain times, the Dionysiac art has come under attack, as by Euripides or Socrates, who would have thought it all feeling and no substance.

 

Near the end of the writing, parallels with modern German art tie in neatly and question the direction of German society as a whole.  Tragedy equates in the end with the Dionysiac form of art.  Nietzsche writes of music and tragic myth that “both transfigure a region where dissonance and the terrible image of the world fade away in chords of delight,” (115).  This linkage finally brings together all of the ranting and raving about the struggles of the Dionysiac art.

 

This reading from the onset struck me as something difficult to understand.  For the better part of the first half I found myself lost in references to all that is Greek and a barrage of wordy arguments.  I found myself reading a thesis about art, where I am normally in the position of reading something that primarily utilizes art for enrichment, not as a tool in argumentation.  My practical-minded self polarized itself therefore from The Birth of Tragedy whereas other readings have been able to maintain my focus.  How tragic! Enter dithyramb. 

 

However, Nietzsche’s brief arguments relating to the decay of society captured my interest as I looked for signs of collapse in today’s societies through the natural cycles of artful bliss and turmoil which Nietzsche makes apparent.  Additionally, the timelessness of this work could not completely evade me.  All of the points Nietzsche brings to light do not lose any validity with time and can be universally applied.  Perhaps this merits The Birth of Tragedy as a work of art in its own right.

 

Food for thought:

·        What does Dionysiac mean?

·        What does Apolline mean?

·        How do Apolline and Dionysiac arts relate to one another?

·        How does Greek art relate to modern German art?

·        How might this work be a reaction to modern political movements?