Product Description

The four early essays in Untimely Meditations are key documents for understanding the development of Nietzsche's thought and clearly anticipate many of his later writings. They deal with such broad topics as the relationship between popular and genuine culture, strategies for cultural reform, the task of philosophy, the nature of education, and the relationship among art, science and life. This new edition presents R. J. Hollingdale's translation of the essays and a new introduction by Daniel Breazeale, who places them in their historical context and discusses their significance for Nietzsche's philosophy.

Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #56968 in Books
• Published on: 1997-11-13
• Original language: German
• Number of items: 1
• Binding: Paperback
• 328 pages

Language Notes
Text: English, German (translation)

Customer Reviews

Unfashionable Observations
Nietzsche wrote "David Strauss, the Confessor and the Writer" in 1873, the first of his Unfashionable Observations, at the behest of Richard Wagner. David Strauss was an eminent theologian, whose The Life of Jesus Critically Examined (1864) had had a tremendous impact due to its demystification of Jesus' life. Strauss had contended that the supernatural claims made about the historical Jesus could be explained in terms of the particular needs of his community. Although Strauss defends Christianity for it's moral ideals, his demythologizing of Jesus appealed to Nietzsche.

Nevertheless, Wagner had been publicly denounced by Strauss in 1865 for having persuaded Ludwig II to fire a musician rival. Not one to forget an assault, Wagner encouraged Nietzsche to read Strauss' recent The Old and the New Faith (1872), which advocated the rejection of the Christian faith in favor of a Darwinian, materialistic and patriotic worldview. Wagner described the book to Nietzsche as extremely superficial, and Nietzsche agreed with Wagner's opinion, despite the similarity of his own views to Strauss' perspective on religion.

This Unfashionable Observation, accordingly, was Nietzsche's attempt to avenge Wagner by attacking Strauss' recent book. In fact, the essay is at least as much an argumentative attack on Strauss as on his book, for Nietzsche identifies Strauss as a cultural "Philistine" and exemplar of pseudoculture. The resulting essay appears extremely intemperate, although erudite, filled with references to many of Nietzsche's scholarly contemporaries. The climax is a literary tour de force, in which Nietzsche cites a litany of malapropisms from Strauss, interspersed with his own barbed comments.

Nietzsche's second Unfashionable Observation, "On the Advantages and Disadvantages of History for Life" (1874) is "unfashionable" because it questions the apparent assumption of nineteenth century German educators that historical knowledge is intrinsically valuable. Nietzsche argues, in contrast, that historical knowledge is valuable only when it has a positive effect on human beings' sense of life. Although he acknowledges that history does provide a number of benefits in this respect, Nietzsche also contends that there are a number of ways in which historical knowledge could prove damaging to those who pursued it and that many of his contemporaries were suffering these ill effects.

Nietzsche contends that history can play three positive roles, which he terms "monumental," "antiquarian," and "critical." Monumental history brings the great achievements of humanity into focus. This genre of history has value for contemporary individuals because it makes them aware of what is possible for human beings to achieve. Antiquarian history, history motivated primarily out of a spirit of reverence for the past, can be valuable to contemporary individuals by helping them appreciate their lives and culture. Critical history, history approached in an effort to pass judgment, provides a counter-balancing effect to that inspired by antiquarian history. By judging the past, those engaged in critical history remain attentive to flaws and failures in the experience of their culture, thereby avoiding slavish blindness in their appreciation of it.

The problem with historical scholarship in his own time, according to Nietzsche, was that historical knowledge was pursued for its own sake. He cited five dangers resulting from such an approach to history: (1) Modern historical knowledge undercuts joy in the present, since it makes the present appear as just another episode. (2) Modern historical knowledge inhibits creative activity by convincing those made aware of the vast sweep of historical currents that their present actions are too feeble to change the past they have inherited. (3) Modern historical knowledge encourages the sense that the inner person is disconnected from the outer world by assaulting the psyche with more information than it can absorb and assimilate. ( 4) Modern historical knowledge encourages a jaded relativism toward reality and present experience, motivated by a sense that because things keep changing present states of affairs do not matter. (5) Modern historical knowledge inspires irony and cynicism about the contemporary individual's role in the world; the historically knowledgeable person comes to feel increasingly like an afterthought in the scheme of things, imbued by a sense of belatedness.

Although Nietzsche was convinced that the current approach to history was psychologically and ethically devastating to his contemporaries, particularly the young, he contends that antidotes could reverse those trends. One antidote is the unhistorical, the ability to forget how overwhelming the deluge of historical information is, and to "enclose oneself within a bounded horizon." A second antidote is the suprahistorical, a shift of focus from the ongoing flux of history to "that which bestows upon existence the character of the eternal and stable, towards art and religion."

Nietzsche's third Unfashionable Observation "Schopenhauer as Educator" (1874), probably provides more information about Nietzsche himself than it does about Schopenhauer or his philosophy.

Schopenhauer, in Nietzsche's idealizing perspective, is exemplary because he was so thoroughly an individual genius. Schopenhauer was one of those rare individuals whose emergence is nature's true goal in producing humanity, Nietzsche suggests. He praises Schopenhauer's indifference to the mediocre academicians of his era, as well as his heroism as a philosophical loner.

Strangely, given Schopenhauer's legendary pessimism, Nietzsche praises his "cheerfulness that really cheers" along with his honesty and steadfastness. But Nietzsche argues that in addition to specific traits that a student might imitate, Schopenhauer offers a more important kind of example. Being himself attuned to the laws of his own character, Schopenhauer directed those students who were incapable of insight to recognize the laws of their own character. By reading and learning from Schopenhauer, one could develop one's own individuality.

"Richard Wagner in Bayreuth" (1876), the fourth and final of Nietzsche's published Unfashionable Observations, was intended as an essay of praise to Wagner, much like "Schopenhauer as Educator." Nietzsche's relationship with Wagner had been strained by the time he wrote the essay, however, and the tension is evident in the text, which emphasizes Wagner's psychology (a theme that would preoccupy Nietzsche in many of his future writings). Nietzsche, himself, may have been concerned about the extent to which the essay might be perceived as unflattering, for he considered not publishing it. Ultimately, Nietzsche published a version of the essay that was considerably less critical of Wagner than were earlier drafts, and Wagner was pleased enough to send a copy of the essay to King Ludwig.

The Transvaluation of All begins here:
The timeliness of these essays belies the political radicalism they express. Taken with his later works, especially

Beyond Good and Evil and the Genealogy of Morals, one catches the man with his ideological 'pants-down'.

--These essays contain in clearest definition, his project of revaluation, and there is no better 'clarification' of

what George Brandes named "aristocratic radicalism" than as it appears here, standing against the currents

of the timely and 'all-too-human' with a vision of what is to come: in all its danger, banality and glory. This is

the aurora before the great battle for Noontide, a Ragnarok for mediocrity and everything socialist.

Nietzsche's Meditations on Culture
These four "Meditations" deal with, as has been noted in other reviews, a very diverse number of topics. Primarily, however (and apart from the scattered passages of philosophical interest), they are criticisms, or more accurately explanations, of culture. Although they deal with issues such as sholarship, literature, science, art, and of course philosophy, the recurring theme in all four is culture. What it is, what kind of culture is desirable, how culture comes about, etc. These discussions are found in each of the Meditations, some more fragmentary than in others.

These are some of Nietzsche's early writings and they reflect that fact. They are similar to "The Birth of Tragedy" to certain degrees in style and in content. They are not fully or even primarily philosophical works. Nietzsche is here still under the influence of Richard Wagner and Arthur Schopenhauer and although it can be seen that he is breaking away from those influences (for instance, the Meditation on Schopenhauer does not focus on Schopenhauer's actual philosophy as a source of education for Nietzsche so much as Schopenhauer the man, and the Meditation on Richard Wagner is not as strong and unified as the other Meditations are and it does not present a wholly flattering picture of Wagner, dwelling as it does on his psychology - it's tenor is not always one entirely of approval) he has not really begun his philosophizing yet.

The other way they show how early on in Nietzsche's career they are is in the writing itself. While "The Birth of Tragedy" had technical issues even ignoring the philological and philosophical concerns (as amazing a work in aesthetics and culture as it was), these four works do as well. Don't get me wrong, even in Nietzsche's first book his command of language shows itself and these are beautifully written pieces in their own right, but neither his first book nor the four Meditations can quite measure up, stylistically, to Nietzsche's later works like "Twilight of the Idols".

Still, the Meditations are interesting in their own right. "David Straus, the Confessor and the Writer" deals with a number of topics. One of these has to do with faith and doctrines of beliefs. Nietzsche, who used to enjoy reading Strauss's "Life of Jesus", blasts Strauss mercilessly (in a way that really hasn't changed if you happen to watch any TV at all) for putting up his own secular faith in place of religious faith and you can almost hear the unspoken words "Last Man" which Nietzsche would write so contemptuously of in "Thus Spoke Zarathustra". The fact that Strauss shared similar views on religion as such with Nietzsche mattered little. Strauss, in Nietzsche's opinion, tried to change the fundamental views of the world (from the supernatural to the material/deterministic) without drawing new conclusions from that. Basically, Strauss was viewed as one of those who saw Darwin and that which he stood for as of great benefit to mankind without realizing the kinds of change such a shift in worldview that implied. Essentially, Strauss represents the type (the Last Man) that has ultimately been victorious, in large parts of the world, over Nietzsche. The kind who shifts his superstitions to material science but keeps the Christian morality, or the Christian conclusions based on that premise (which, because of the shift from afterworld to this world, is no longer a valid premise).

Later on, Nietzsche bashes Strauss's prose, although the final examples of bad German that Nietzsche picked apart in the original are simply cut out of this version because of the translation difficulties. It would be somewhat pointless to hear a German criticism in German _of_ German if it has all been rendered (deliberately badly) into English.

"On the Uses and Disadvantages of History for Life" is an interesting piece which points out a central tenet of Nietzsche's philosophy of life. A thing may only be "good" to the extent that it is life-promoting. This is, I'm pretty sure, the main reason Nietzsche fought so hard against anything he perceived as nihilistic. Nietzsche says in here that to a certain extent, for man to function, he must be "unhistorical". On the other hand, he applauds the type who can be as historical as possible and still function. Throughout these meditations you get a sense of Nietzsche's approval of the "higher" or aristocratic type that was to culminate in his conception of the overman.

"Schopenhauer as Educator" is, as I have said, not so much about Schopenhauer's philosophy as it is about the lesson's Nietzsche took from Schopenhauer's life. Nietzsche claimed, towards the end of his life, that this essay was not written about Schopenhauer but about himself. While I don't really buy that, I am inclined to grant, after reading it, that some of the attributes Nietzsche praises in Schopenhauer were either slightly altered or completely fabricated and that Nietzsche was writing into this Meditation things he admired and wished to emulate. For one thing, I don't think you could really say that Schopenhauer was "cheerful" in any sense of the word. Schopenhauer was a pessimist in more than just a philosophical sense and his writings about anything contemporary or tangible seem bitter (not just the stuff about Hegel).

I'll leave off the final Meditation. It's not as clear as the others, but there is a lot of interesting cultural commentary, including a very great deal about art and culture. There is one passage I would like to quote as an example: "Wherever 'form' is nowadays demanded, in society and in conversation, in literary expression, in traffic between states, what is involuntarily understood by it is a pleasing appearance, the antithesis of the true concept of form as shape necessitated by content, which has nothing to do with 'pleasing' or 'displeasing' preciesly because it is necessary and not arbitrary." (Richard Wagner in Bayreuth pg. 216)

Although there was a revolt against form in the early part of the 20th Century, like most revolts it made certain gains and was summarily crushed.

These Meditations constitute necessary reading for any serious Nietzschean (and I use that term without any sense of irony - if Nietzsche hadn't wanted adherents he shouldn't have left any writings, unsystematic or not) and help greatly with a proper understanding of his ideas (which can be misconstrued if you start with later writings and don't read them analytically).

This translation is, of course, excellent and the Cambridge Texts series is about the best on the market right now. Even though I have the paperback editions of Nietzsche's works the binding is more durable than some hardcover books I have purchased.