I imagine that, taking this title
in isolation from the content and chronological sequence of this section, it is
a less than one-in-a-billion probability that it should be immediately
associated with the famous phrase of Nietzsche, used by him on a couple of
occasions, referring to Schopenhauer, Goethe, Hegel, and Heine in one instance,
and to Goethe alone in another. For this reason, I am using this phrase in the
title of my entry on Goethe (1749-1832). Calling Goethe (1749-1832) “a European event” may certainly have a lesser
effect on most modern readers than, say, Ben Jonson’s dictum on Shakespeare: “He was not for an age, but for all time.” But in
Nietzsche’s usage Europe becomes synonymous with the whole Western
Civilization, and thus his characterization of Goethe is not a limitation, but
a generalization and internationalization, as he himself explains it.
Goethe was of course a
world-historical and world-cultural phenomenon which, being in a class of his
own, cannot be broadly classified. He was most definitely a philosopher in the
Russian sense of the word, but in a broader sense one can call him a literary
sage, and much more. He was a trend-setter for the Zeitgeist, a man who
influenced the civilized Western world for more than a century after his death
and if today he no longer exerts a comparable influence on modern civilization,
it is not because he has grown dimmer with time, but because our era has
perhaps shrunk too small to contain him.
George Eliot called him “the last true polymath to walk the earth.” She
is obviously referring to the fact of him being a scientist, in addition to
everything else. His work on plant morphology purportedly influenced Darwin.
Hegel, although not a big expert in science, applauds Goethe’s work in
meteorology, and the term Goethe Barometer denotes an actual barometer
based on the Torricelli principle, popularized by Goethe in Germany. In 1810 he
published his Theory of Colors, of which he allegedly said this: “…As to what I have done as a poet, I take no pride in
it. But that in my century I am the only one who knows the truth in the
difficult science of colors, of that, I say, I am not a little proud, and here
I have a consciousness of a superiority to many.
Yet, I somehow think that he was
not the epitome of a bona fide polymath, but rather a literary genius, who cast
sparks of that genius around, into science included. There were also two
particular reasons for Goethe to direct himself into science, here and now.
One, that he had a very high opinion of science, likening it to art. (Science and art belong to the whole world, and before them
vanish the borders of nationality.) And a second one can be surmised from the following
dictum, undoubtedly personally felt through: Fresh
activity is the only means of overcoming adversity. Considering that during the Napoleonic occupation
of Weimar Goethe had a highly traumatic experience (especially the one in
1806), channeling his energy into a fresh activity, such as his theory
of colors, could well have been his means of overcoming adversity. Goethe
has been explicit, however, on what kind of activity was the closest to his
heart: “All the knowledge I possess, everyone else
can acquire, but my heart is all my own.” His
superior opinion of literary activity is further gleaned from many lines like
this: “The decline of literature indicates the
decline of the nation.” Or this: “The
artist alone sees spirits, but once he tells his story, everyone can see them.”
Creativity is undoubtedly valued by him higher than scientific work, but his
previously quoted opinion of his Theory of Colors may well be attributed
to his overwhelming pride for undertaking this meaningful scientific effort, despite
the more natural predisposition for a different type of activity.
To be continued...
No comments:
Post a Comment