Bernaldez, Ruel Benjamin M.

4PHL

Understanding Nietzsche’s Aesthetics

Friedrich Nietzsche’s aesthetics about the Birth of Tragedy is greatly influenced by two

philosophers: Arthur Schopenhauer with his philosophy of the will and Richard Wagner, both as

a writer of cultural-aesthetic essays and a composer.1 Of course, our focus is not only Friedrich

Nietzsche’s Birth of Tragedy but we will also be studying Nietzsche’s concept of aesthetic

during his positivist life and his later life. In the Birth of Tragedy (BT) there are two dualities

that are the source of the development of art which are the Apollonian and Dionysian. Nietzsche

did not talk about the birth of tragedy but also its death because of Socrates which will be

discussed later. The term Dionysian and the Apollonian we borrow from the Greeks, who

disclose to the discerning mind the profound mysteries of their view of art, not, to be sure, in

concepts, but in the intensely clear figures of their gods.2 Art is the result between these two

opposing yet complimentary principles. The birth of tragedy can be divided into two parts, the

first of which contains the first fifteen sections and has a cultural-historical focus.3 The other one

is concerned about the possibility of the rebirth of tragedy. Nietzsche claims that art and gods

have the same origin and that is the defense against the atrocities of life. Apollo is the Greek god

of sunlight and daytime, of individuality, rationality and order.4 In art, sculpture is most related

to Apollo because it signifies peace. The existence of Apollo is the rescue from suffering for the

Greeks because for them life is too terrible to be lived. On the other hand we have Dionysius

whose main characteristic is transgression. Most transgression associated with the Dionysian

festival occur in a state of intoxication and frenzy, an orgiastic abandon during which
1
Hammermeister, Kai. The German Aesthetic Tradition, p.138. Cambridge University Press.
2
Neill, Alex and Ridley, Aaron. The Philosophy of Art, p.25. McGraw-Hill Companies, inc.
3
Hammermeister, Kai. The German Aesthetic Tradition, p.138. Cambridge University Press.
4
Hammermeister, Kai. The German Aesthetic Tradition, p.139. Cambridge University Press.
dichotomies such as male and female, subject and object, are collapsed.5 If sculpture is related to

Apollo, music on the other hand is related to Dionysius. We can see the importance of these two

principles for Nietzsche’s BT. In a tragedy the Dionysian suffering of an individual becomes an

art because of the Apollonian influence in it. An idea - the antithesis Dionysian and Apollonian –

translated into the metaphysical; history itself as the evolution of this idea; in tragedy this

antithesis developed into a unity.6 Nietzsche called it a Dionysian because even in the most

horrifying and however great the problem may be still the tragic hero affirms life. That is why he

said that the recognition of reality is for the strong man. That is the reason why these two

opposing principles are complimentary in Greek Tragedy. For Nietzsche, the Dionysian is the

hero of Tragedy. As he said in the BT that we recognize in tragedy a sweeping opposition of

styles: the language, colour, nobility and dynamics of speech fall apart into the Dionysian lyrics

of the chorus and, on the other hand, the Apollonian dream world, and become two utterly

different spheres of expression.7 The Apollonian dream world gives tragedy its effect and makes

the audience be on the stage or rather makes the audience feel the tension of the drama.

Nietzsche clearly emphasized the importance of the Dionysian. For Nietzsche, this drama of

which Dionysus becomes dismembered corresponds to the catastrophe of individuation, ‘the

origin and primal cause of all suffering’ which tragedy and art must heal, a healing that once

again corresponds to the Dionysian drama but this time to the god’s rebirth conceived of as the

end of individuation.8 According to Nietzsche the Dionysian work of art considers man as the

only work of art. Man becomes the art in itself and not merely as an artist. Nietzsche also said

that Greek tragedy begins and end with the chorus, the Dionysian mass that knows no

5
Hammermeister, Kai. The German Aesthetic Tradition, p.140. Cambridge University Press.
6
Nietzsche, Friedrich. Ecce Homo, p. 49. Penguin Books.
7
Pothen, Philip. Nietzsche and the fate of Art, p. 17. Ashgate Publishing Limited.
8
Ibid.
individuality.9 We must understand that in a Greek tragedy there is a Dionysian chorus which is

inside the Apollonian world of images or dreams. We must be aware in the fact that Nietzsche

said that sculpture best describe the Apollonian and music on the other hand best describes the

Dionysian. But Nietzsche did not mention anything about painting and architecture.

Man, is conscious about his surroundings which he sees as horrific and absurd. And

because of such perception art becomes the saving grace. When the danger to his will is greatest,

art approaches as a saving sorceress, expert at healing.10 Man becomes nauseated with his

surrounding so art turns these horrible thoughts to something which man can live with. In short,

art transforms such nauseating thoughts into something that is pleasant for man.

Nietzsche also talked about the Greek chorus which he found and agreed with Schiller.

The chorus is a living wall against the assaults of reality because it – the satyr chorus –

represents existence more truthfully, really, and completely than the man of culture does who

ordinarily considers himself as the only reality.11 There must be a question on why did they

make the chorus as a group of satyr? According to Nietzsche the Greeks saw the satyr as an

archetype of man which is the embodiment of his highest emotions. The Satyr is also compared

to nature which is unchanged by knowledge. The satyr chorus is, first of all, a vision of the

Dionysian mass of spectators, just as the world of the stage, in turn, is a vision of this satyr

chorus: the force of this vision is strong enough to make the eye insensitive and blind to the

impression of “reality” to the men of culture who occupy the rows of seats all around.12 We must

understand that the Greek tragedy is a Dionysian chorus that lives on the Apollonian world of

images. That is the reason why the chorus can make the audience believe, it is because of the

Apollonian principle that helps them. The chorus for Nietzsche is the foundation of Greek
9
Hammermeister, Kai. The German Aesthetic Tradition, p.140. Cambridge University Press.
10
Neill, Alex and Ridley, Aaron. The Philosophy of Art, p.28. McGraw-Hill Companies, inc.
11
Neill, Alex and Ridley, Aaron. The Philosophy of Art, p. 29. McGraw-Hill Companies, inc.
12
Neill, Alex and Ridley, Aaron. The Philosophy of Art, p.25. McGraw-Hill Companies, inc.
tragedy because for this chorus the Greek built up the scaffolding of a fictitious natural state and

on it placed fictitious natural beings.13 The chorus serves as a barrier between the real world and

the stage. For Nietzsche the chorus is a metaphysical consolation of tragedy which is the

encouraging insight that life is still indestructible and pleasurable considering that there exist

suffering and death. The satyr was something sublime and divine: thus he had to appear to the

painfully broken vision of Dionysian man.14 The chorus is naturally assigned to excite the mood

of the listeners in order for them to feel the tension. And because of that when the audience now

sees the tragic hero they will not just see the masked human being but it would transform into a

visionary figure.

For Nietzsche it is not only Greek tragedy that has the Apollonian and Dionysian

principles but rather for him all art belongs to these two principles. We can conclude that art for

Nietzsche always contains these two principles mentioned. Any form of art contains these

principles weather it may be painting, sculpture or poetry. Nietzsche criticized the tragedies of

Euripides. He said that the tragedies of Euripides is the cause of the end of the genre because in

them tragedy is cleansed of its Dionysian element and the hero is replaced by the average man. 15

Nietzsche said that in the scientific age beauty is falsely considered through cognition.

According to Nietzsche knowledge is the cause of the silence in the development of arts in the

modern age. That is the reason why Nietzsche greatly criticized Socrates and his conception of

aesthetics. Nietzsche and Socrates are opposing each other; for Nietzsche, tragedy must be

focusing on the plot of the story and make the audience think about the plot and give the

audience suspense about the story but on the other hand Socrates was more focused on the

rhetorical part and considering the plot as unimportant.

13
Neill, Alex and Ridley, Aaron. The Philosophy of Art, p.27. McGraw-Hill Companies, inc.
14
Neill, Alex and Ridley, Aaron. The Philosophy of Art, p.29. McGraw-Hill Companies, inc.
15
Hammermeister, Kai. The German Aesthetic Tradition, p. 141. Cambridge University Press.
 The Dionysian and Apollonian principles according to Nietzsche are not only the two

necessary forces of all artistic production but they are also the principles of nature. Therefore art

includes in itself nature. Artistic power for Nietzsche comes from nature and he said that an artist

is only an imitator. Nietzsche also views that art is a stimulant to life because art covers all the

impure thought and thus making life bearable to perceive. On the other hand, Nietzsche viewed

religion as a hindrance for the development of art. He said that the artist, as the religious

believer, cannot shed his faith in “the fantastic, mystical, insecure, extreme, the predilection for

the symbol, the overvaluation of the person, the belief in something miraculous in the genius”

with these attitudes the artist remains stuck at an infantile stage of development.16 It is because

religion is following rules and excludes many things that they think is immoral. For art to

develop it needs to explore the different boundaries of nature and of culture. Religion on the

other hand stops the artist from exploring new things. That is why Nietzsche opposes the relation

or we can say the synthesis of religion and art. In a way, religion is inclosing itself to the outside

world and thus is only limited to its dogmas but art cannot live in a closed space like religion.

Nietzsche wants to show to us the effect of our deep relation to religion and its effects to our

development and to culture. Christianity for Nietzsche is neither Apollonian nor Dionysian, it

negates all aesthetic values.17

Greek tragedy in its earliest form had for its sole theme the sufferings of Dionysus and

that for a long time the only stage hero was Dionysus himself. 18 Before Euripides all the tragic

hero is Dionysus himself and the characters are only masks of Dionysus. He appears at all with

such epic precision and clarity is the work of the dream-interpreter, Apollo, who through this

symbolic appearance interprets to the chorus its Dionysian state.19 Nietzsche promises a tragic
16
Hammermeister, Kai. The German Aesthetic Tradition, p. 145. Cambridge University Press.
17
Nietzsche, Friedrich. Ecce Homo, p. 49. Penguin Books.
18
Neill, Alex and Ridley, Aaron. The Philosophy of Art, p.34. McGraw-Hill Companies, inc.
19
Neill, Alex and Ridley, Aaron. The Philosophy of Art, p.35. McGraw-Hill Companies, inc.
age when man is able to accept life or affirm life. When man have the consciousness of the most

wicked of wars but not suffering from it. Dionysus was the only hero that the Greeks can

produce because for the reason that all individuals taken as mere individual are just comic and

therefore they are untragic. That is why the Greeks are not tolerating individuals on the tragic

stage but rather only Dionysus. Dionysus appears in a multiple form that is why he was able to

perform as different tragic hero but for this to be possible the help of Apollo is needed. Apollo

who is the interpreter of dreams interprets to the chorus a Dionysian state.

For Nietzsche art must give way to science because science is more developed than that

of art. According to Nietzsche a world of science do not need art because as he had said science

is much more advanced or developed than art and so why need something that is less developed?

Nietzsche says “Scientific man is the higher development of artistic man.”20

Art involves illusion in the sense that it posits something that, strictly peaking, is not

there.21 In this Nietzsche is trying to say that art is a question of belief and not of truth. Nietzsche

says that there is nothing but illusions but they cease to be illusions because of the

acknowledgement that they are nothing but illusions and therefore in some kind it becomes true.

Illusions are said to be stimulus to life but in order for illusions to be a stimulus it must first have

a strength-effect. This strength-effect determines the ability of the illusion to convince the

audience that a thing is real. If illusions are to be judged by its strength-effect only then artistic

illusions must be true because they get their strength-effect through illusions. On the other hand

Nietzsche comments about poetry and says that poetry is nonsense which is similar to religion.

Nietzsche refers the poet as a deceiver and such deception became a big part in Nietzsche’s view

of poetry.

20
Hammermeister, Kai. The German Aesthetic Tradition, p. 145. Cambridge University Press.
21
Pothen, Philip. Nietzsche and the fate of Art, p. 31. Ashgate Publishing Limited.
 Nietzsche also talked about Euripides and on how he helped in struggle of tragedy.

Euripides made a new genre which is called New Attic Comedy. By this genre he brought the

audience in the stage. He made the genre possible through the use of the ordinary language.

Everyday life can be presented on the stage because it genre involves the portrayal of the daily

lives of the people. And because of this they were able to pass judgments for the reason that they

can clearly understand the scenario because it is happening in their lives. Euripides brought the

spectator to the stage in order to make him competent to pass judgment.22 He had done such

thing because he portrayed the daily lives of the audience. Euripides established the rise of an

aggressive rationalism which will contradict the mythical basis of tragedy. Euripides constructed

tragedy as purely Apollonian because he is unable to understand or appreciate the Dionysian

principle.

Nietzsche broadens the notion of aesthetics in such a way that it encompasses ontology,

cosmology, ethics, anthropology, and epistemology.23 The philosophy of Nietzsche therefore

always includes aesthetics. Art has a purpose of course and for Nietzsche its purpose is to

stimulate a person’s vital energy. The beautiful will give a person an increase in power but on the

other hand the ugly gives man depression and thus Nietzsche considers ugliness as unhealthy.

Nietzsche does not consider the cosmos as the only artwork but rather he considers the self as an

artwork. He said that “as aesthetic phenomenon existence is always bearable, and art gives us the

eye and hand and especially the good conscience to turn ourselves into such a phenomenon.”24

Nietzsche argues for an understanding of aesthetics that investigates neither qualities of the

object nor intentions or procedures of the artists, but merely the subjective response to the

aesthetic object.25 Nietzsche emphasized that the value of an object is not from the artist or from
22
Neill, Alex and Ridley, Aaron. The Philosophy of Art, p.35. McGraw-Hill Companies, inc.
23
Hammermeister, Kai. The German Aesthetic Tradition, p. 146 Cambridge University Press.
24
Hammermeister, Kai. The German Aesthetic Tradition, p. 147. Cambridge University Press.
25
Hammermeister, Kai. The German Aesthetic Tradition, p. 147. Cambridge University Press.
the object. To consider something as beautiful for Nietzsche relies on the audience or the viewer

and not on the artist itself or even not on the object. The viewer becomes the source of approval

weather an object is beautiful or not and the object itself is not the source of its being beautiful.

Nietzsche notes in the will to power that aesthetics is just applied physiology. He argues that

physiological judgments have replaced aesthetic ones. As much as the self is seen as a work of

art then it becomes a physiological self which needs to feel strong. On the other hand Nietzsche

wrote on the twilight of the idols that man is the only beauty. Nothing is beautiful except for

man.

According to Nietzsche aesthetic Socratism is one of the causes of the death of tragedy.

As mentioned earlier knowledge for Nietzsche is an enemy of art. Aesthetic Socratism has its

dogma that in order to be beautiful everything must be intelligible. Nietzsche of course disagrees

to such notion. For Nietzsche knowledge interferes in the Dionysian and Apollonian state and

therefore causes them to disappear. Thus, knowledge causes tragedy to lose its artistic form. An

example of that is the Euripidean prologue which shows the productivity of rationality. It is

stated that a single character should emerge at the beginning of the play, say who he is, what

precedes the action, what has happened up until now, indeed what will happen in the course of

the play, would be condemned by a modern dramatist as a willful and unpardonable renunciation

of the effect of suspense.26 The existence of excitement is being eliminated by such actions. In

such actions tragedy then would not be based on epic suspense but rather it will be based on

rhetorical scenes. Aesthetic Socratism therefore is not attempting to enhance the plot of tragedy

but rather it is enhaning pathos or sorrow. For aesthetic Socratism everything that is not intended

to enhance pathos will be considered as erroneous. Nietzsche said that Euripides noticed that the

audience is focusing more on solving the problem of the story and hence the poetic beauty and
26
Nietzsche, Friedrich. The Birth of Tragedy, p.71. Oxford University Press.
the pathos are lost to the audience. And because of that, Euripides made the character to tell the

plot so that the audience could be focusing on the rhetorical beauty of the actor rather than on

solving the plot. Nietzsche, of course, disagreed to such idea.

Nietzsche said that for Socrates tragic art did not even appear to tell the truth: quite apart

from the fact that it addresses the man who is not very bright rather than the philosopher.27

Socrates counted tragic art among the flattering arts because it is portraying pleasure rather than

usefulness or we can call it knowledge. Because tragic art is only portraying pleasure Socrates

considered it as an unphilosophical stimulant. Nietzsche emphasized that at such point in history

art has been dominated by philosophical thoughts and is forced to embrace dialectic. He said that

Socrates reminds us of the related nature of the Euripidean hero, who must defend his actions by

arguments and counter-arguments and in the process so often risks forfeiting our tragic

compassion.28 This is the start of the death of the Greek tragedy for Nietzsche because the

Dionysian and the Apollonian principles had been superceded by the philosophical thoughts. The

consequences of the Socratic principles: ‘knowledge is virtue; sin is the result of ignorance; the

virtuous man is the happy man;’ in this three forms of optimism lies the death of tragedy.29

According to Nietzsche for now on the virtuous hero must be a dialectician compared to the past

which focuses more on the suffering of Dionysus who is the only tragic hero of the Greek.

Nietzsche added that dialectic drives music away from tragedy because of its syllogisms. He said

that it destroys the essence of tragedy which is the Dionysian state of intoxication.

As we can see, Nietzsche’s aesthetics is very complicated and is found in some of his

works like the Twilight of the Idols, The Birth of Tragedy and in his will to power. But more

interestingly Nietzsche’s aesthetics focuses more on the ancient Greeks and their tragedy. He

27
Nietzsche, Friedrich. The Birth of Tragedy, p.77 Oxford University Press.
28
Nietzsche, Friedrich. The Birth of Tragedy, p.78. Oxford University Press.
29
ibid.
made it clear that the two opposing principles are the most important principles in a tragic drama

and their unity is the source of Greek tragedy. Nietzsche gave importance to the self and

considered it as art in itself. We can notice that Nietzsche’s aesthetics is on a historical point of

view in the Birth of Tragedy and that he made criticism against Socrates who he said is a

“demon.” It is important that in studying Nietzsche’s aesthetics we can see that he is also

opposing the relationship of art and religion and particularly the catholic religion. Here, we can

see that nature of him which is anti-clerical. He insisted that religion traps art because religion is

caught in its circle and because of that, art is being pulled back and cannot evolve. Nietzsche in

regards to Socrates is very insisting that aesthetic Socratism is the cause of the fall of Tragedy

because of its removal of Dionysian and Apollonian principles. Although some are saying that

his approach to aesthetics is somewhat empty in such a way that what he is saying is ambiguous.

There is another thing that I noticed in the Birth of Tragedy. For me Nietzsche emphasized the

importance of life as he had pointed out that even though life is considered by the Greeks as

horrible or even the Greeks sees life as unpleasant it is still good. And such goodness can be

conceived in art or in tragedy, that the tragic hero’s death must not be considered horrible but

rather it should be considered as good because the audience now will be returning to the beauty

of life. Nietzsche included the importance of life in his work because of the influence of his time.

It is because during his time there exists the war between France and Germany and such event

triggered Nietzsche’s conception of the goodness of life behind its unpleasantness.