Questions:
From Hesse’s Zarathustra’s Return
The question of destiny: What if our destiny is that of a life of a Pariah (the ‘untouchables’ – the lowest rank in the Indian caste system) or a Shudra whose whole life is blemished by ostracism, a manifold of abuse inflicted upon by others and pure suffering. Should we then still ‘face’ our destiny and live by it?
This issue is disconcerting to me because in Hesse’s Zarathustra “A man who has recognized his destiny never tries to change it. The endeavor to change destiny is a childish pursuit that makes men quarrel and kill one another.” This definitely parallels Nietzsche’s account of inequalities in society in The Antichrist when he claims that “The inequality of rights is the first condition for the existence of any rights at all” [pp. 646] and that “The order of the castes, the supreme law, the dominant law is a sanction of a natural order…[symbolic of] a healthy society.” It seems to me as though on the one hand, we are to ‘face our destiny’ yet on the other hand, Nietzsche seems to want us to ‘will our lives in to being.’ For instance, in Thus Spoke Zarathustra, he urges us to shake off the spirit of gravity – “the most supreme and powerful devil” [TSZ pp. 220] and to “create the world before which [one] can kneel.” [TSZ pp. 225] This Nietzsche says, is our ultimate hope and intoxication! [TSZ pp. 225] How then can we reconcile these two conflicting ideas of destiny? One of simply sticking by our destiny and one that urges us to will and bend everything for ourselves? Is obedience then good or bad?
From Hesse’s Zarathustra’s Return
The question of action and suffering: Is there something we are suffering for? Or is life simply just suffering? Because if the latter is true, then isn’t Nietzsche conforming to Schopenhauer’s negative view of life instead of his original aim to reverse it into a positive willing of life?
In Thus Spoke Zarathustra, Nietzsche wants us to be “the teacher of [our own] eternal destiny.” Zarathustra urges man to live as though that moment in life recurs eternally i.e. to “live in every Now [where] being begins!” [TSZ pp. 330]. But if to do this, we have to spend all our life facing challenges and suffering as in Hesse’s Zarathustra who writes: “The ability to suffer well is more than half of life – indeed it is all life. Birth is suffering, growth is suffering, the seed suffers the earth, the root suffers the rain…” then what is the joy in doing so, in facing life, in suffering and in living the moment eternally? What really is the psychological motivation (for Nietzsche and Hesse) to live such a life? I find that these aspects are not too explicated upon. Do they expect man to love pain (a converse of man’s nature that naturally makes one shirk away from - pain?)
From Aschheim’s Zarathustra in the Trenches
Was Nietzsche aware of the ramifications of his writings?
Upon reading Aschheim’s account of the brutalization and abuses of Nietzsche’s writings, I found it important to know if Nietzsche wrote whatever he did bearing in mind that he would be supplying support that made dehumanization and widespread war and afflict so possible. Was he at all concerned with the ethical aspects of his writings? Was he aware (while he was still alive) that his works are being misused? Did respond to these abusements if he was cognizant of them?
Difficult Passages:
From Aschheim’s Zarathustra in the Trenches
“The young Mussolini, for example began in the socialist camp but his Marxism was always influenced by Nietzsche, integrated with the Lebensphilosophie of the time, and less concerned with ideology than heroic will and vitality. Here was a manly Marxism grounded in a warrior relationship to reality.”
I found that the aspect of how was he influenced by Nietzsche was not really elaborated upon much.
From Aschheim’s Zarathustra in the Trenches
“The entire intellectual elite of Europe rose as one man in the defense of their “cherished heritage” which they had till then viewed with some skepticism…they rose against enemies like Tolstoy, Dostoevsky and Pushkin and Zola and Balzac and Anatole France and Shaw…and went to war with Goethe and Nietzsche in their knapsacks.”
Who are these people?
From Hesse’s Zarathustra’s Return
“With regard to nation and collectivity, let every man act as his needs and conscience dictate – but if in the process he loses himself, his own soul, whatever he does will be worthless.”
I’m not really clear as to why the last claim that if in the process, one loses himself, whatever he does will be worthless.
No comments:
Post a Comment