Tuesday, February 3, 2015

UNHISTORICAL AND OTHER LIVING. PART II.


Now here is yet another important excerpt from Nietzsche’s Vom Nutzen und Nachteil der Historie für das Leben, Section 8:

“So, one finds, especially in the greater and more highly developed historical men, a consciousness, often subdued to the point of general skepticism, of how great is the absurdity and superstition in the belief that the education of a people must be as predominantly historical as it is now: after all, the strongest peoples, strong in deeds and works, have lived differently, have raised their youth differently.”

(I must now make a pause here and think at length and in-depth on how the concept of the “unhistorical” society can be applied to modern American society. What are the parallels? Does American society need a European-style education at all? Apparently, Nietzsche’s biting criticism of Europe in this passage points to the fact that the problems of modern American society lie not in a disregard for the time-honored European traditions, but in something else, such as a slide toward a utilitarian labor-market approach to man and his individuality, as well as a host of other sickening influences, denying this society a truly healthy chance to live unhistorically, while converting it into a degenerating hybrid, burdened with the disadvantages of both types, yet allowed the strengths of neither.)

The next most interesting point that catches my immediate attention is Nietzsche finding an inconsistency and contradiction in the Christian deification of history, whereas it is only too commonly stated that Satan is not only the ruler of this world, but the ruler of history as well. (Hence, so much evil in History! This is of course in an even sharper conflict with the Hegelian view of History as the process of the self-realization of the Spirit.)

What, statistics prove that there are laws of history? Laws? Well, so far as there are laws in history, laws are worth nothing and history is worth nothing. But just this kind of history is now universally valued, the kind which takes the great mass drives to be the important and chief point of history and regards all great men only as the clearest expression, the bubbles that become visible on the flood. Here the masses are out of themselves to give birth to greatness, that is, chaos is out of itself to give birth to order. Everything is then called great which has for a prolonged time moved such masses and which, as one says, has been “a historical power.” But is that not quite intentionally to confuse quantity with quality? If the masses have found some thought or other, say, a religious thought, adequate, tenaciously defend it, and drag it through centuries: then and only just then the finder and founder of that thought is said to be great. But why?! The noblest and highest has no effect on the masses; the historical success of Christianity proves nothing, as regards the greatness of its founder, since basically it testifies against him. Greatness is not to depend on success, and Demosthenes had greatness, even though he had no success. The purest and the most truthful adherents of Christianity have always questioned and impeded, rather than promoted, its worldly success, its so-called historical power; they used to take a stand outside the world, and did not concern themselves with the “process of the Christian idea,” which is why they have mostly remained unknown and unnamed by history. Expressed in Christian way, the devil is the regent of the world and the master of success and progress. He is the real power in all historical power, and so it will remain, even though it may ring quite painfully in the ears of an age that deifies success and historical power. (See my special comment on this passage in the entry Success And Greatness in the Contradiction section.)

And lastly, in section 10 of his work, Nietzsche decides to provide the following definitions to his freshly discovered terms: What are the cures for the historical malady? Not surprisingly, they bear the names of poisons: the antidotes to the historical are the unhistorical and the superhistorical. With these names we return to the beginnings of our essay and to their calm.

By the word “unhistorical” I denote the art and the strength of being able to forget and enclose oneself in a limited horizon. ‘Superhistorical’ I call the powers which guide the eye away from becoming and toward that, which gives existence an eternal and stable character, toward art and religion. Science sees in that force, in these powers, hostile powers and forces: for it only takes the observation of things to be the true and correct one, that is, to be scientific observation, which sees what has come to be, the historical, and nowhere being, the eternal; it lives in inner contradiction with the eternizing powers of art and religion so far as it hates forgetting, the death of knowledge, so far as it seeks to remove all horizon limitations and throws man into an endless-unlimited light-wave-sea of known becoming.

Now, is life to rule over knowledge, over science, or is knowledge to rule over life? No one will doubt that life is the higher, ruling authority, for any knowledge which destroys life would also have destroyed itself. Knowledge presupposes life and so, has the same interest in the preservation of life which every being has in its continued existence. Therefore science requires a higher supervision and guarding: a hygiene of life is placed close beside science, and one proposition of this hygiene would read: “The unhistorical and the superhistorical are the natural antidotes to the stifling of life by history, to the historical malady.”

It is probable that we, the historically sick, will have to suffer from the antidotes, but that we suffer from them is no proof that the treatment is incorrect.

Nietzsche ends his masterpiece by expressing hope in the young generations that would come and correct the wrongs of the old-timers:

And here I recognize the mission of that youth, that first generation of fighters, which precedes a happier and more beautiful culture and humanity. This youth will suffer from the malady and from the antidote at the same time, and yet they will boast of stronger health than their educated forebears. They will be more ignorant, but at the final point in their cure they will have become human again, that is something!

Youth, my foot! Indeed, they have learned to live unhistorically, and perhaps, superhistorically, too, but at what price? Their new culture of the future, of money, drugs, profanity, and militant immorality is hardly a harbinger of ‘a happier and more beautiful culture and humanity.’ What differs modern youth from animals however is that despite living like animals they are not happy, like them having inherited their vices without their redeeming virtues. Their best moments are dull and uneventful while their worst will be forever etched in their unforgotten memory unless washed out of their systems by alcohol and by the water with which they swallow their handfuls of prescription pills and forbidden narcotics…

I said it before and I will say it again, my friend Nietzsche was an incorrigible optimist, and this exuberant optimism of his was blinding his otherwise superior senses and corrupting his better judgment!

No comments:

Post a Comment