Part Eight: Peoples and Fatherlands
240
I
have heard, once again for the first time - Richard Wagner's overture to the Meistersinger:
it is a magnificent, overladen, heavy and late art
which has the pride to presuppose for its understanding that two centuries of
music are still living - it is to the credit of the Germans that such a pride
was not misplaced! What forces
and juices, what seasons and zones are not mixed together here! Now it seems archaic, now strange, acid and
too young, it is as arbitrary as it is pompous-traditional, it is not infrequently
puckish, still more often rough and uncouth - it has fire and spirit and at the
same time the loose yellow skin of fruits which ripen too late. It flows broad and full: and suddenly a
moment of inexplicable hesitation, as it were a gap between cause and effect,
an oppression producing dreams, almost a nightmare - but already the old stream
of well-being broadens and widens again, the stream of the most manifold
well-being, of happiness old and new, very much including the happiness
of the artist in himself, which he has no desire to conceal, his happy,
astonished knowledge of the masterliness of the means
he is here employing, new, newly acquired, untried artistic means, as his art
seems to betray to us. All in all, no
beauty, nothing of the south or of subtle southerly brightness of sky, nothing
of gracefulness, no dance, hardly any will to logic; a certain clumsiness,
even, which is actually emphasized, as if the artist wanted to say: 'it is
intentional'; a cumbersome drapery, something capriciously barbarous and
solemn, a fluttering of venerable learned lace and conceits; something German
in the best and worst sense of the word, something manifold, formless and
inexhaustible in the German fashion; a certain German powerfulness and overfullness of soul which is not afraid to hide itself
among the refinements of decay - which perhaps feels itself most at east there;
a true, genuine token of the German soul, which is at once young and aged,
over-mellow and still too rich in future.
This kind of music best expresses what I consider true of the Germans:
they are of the day before yesterday and the day after tomorrow - they have
as yet no today.
241
We
'good Europeans': we too have our hours when we permit ourselves a warm-hearted
patriotism, a lapse and regression into old loves and narrownesses
- I have just given an example of it - hours of national ebullition, of
patriotic palpitations and floods of various outmoded feelings. More ponderous spirits than we may have done
with what in our case is confined to a few hours and is then over only after a
longer period: one takes half a year, another half a life, according to the
speed and power with which he digests it and of his 'metabolism'. Indeed, I can imagine dull, sluggish races
which, even in our fast-moving Europe, would need half a century to overcome
such atavistic attacks of patriotism and cleaving to one's native soil and to
be restored to reason, I mean to 'good Europeanism'. And, while digressing on this possibility, I
chanced to become the ear-witness of a conversation between two old 'patriots'
- it is clear they were both hard of hearing and thus spoke all the
louder. 'He has and knows as much
philosophy as a peasant or a fraternity student,' said one of them: 'he is
still innocent. But what does that
matter nowadays! It is the age of the
masses: they fall on their faces before anything massive. And in politicis likewise. A statesman who builds for them another
242
Whether
that which now distinguishes the European be called 'civilization' or
'humanization' or 'progress'; whether one calls it simply, without implying any
praise or blame, the democratic movement in Europe: behind all the moral
and political foregrounds indicated by such formulas a great physiological
process is taking place and gathering greater and ever greater impetus - the
process of the assimilation of all Europeans, their growing detachment from the
conditions under which races dependent on climate and class originate, their
increasing independence of any definite milieu which, through making the
same demands for centuries, would like to inscribe itself soul and body - that
is to say, the slow emergence of an essentially supra-national and nomadic type
of man which, physiologically speaking, possesses as its typical distinction a
maximum of the art and power of adaptation.
This process of the becoming European, the tempo of which can be
retarded by great relapses but which will perhaps precisely through them gain
in vehemence and depth - the still-raging storm and stress of 'national
feeling' belongs here, likewise the anarchism now emerging - : this process
will probably lead to results which its naive propagators and panegyrists, the
apostles of 'modern ideas', would be least inclined to anticipate. The same novel conditions which will on average
create a levelling and mediocritizing of man - a
useful, industrious, highly serviceable and able herd-animal man - are adapted
in the highest degree to giving rise to exceptional men of the most dangerous
and enticing quality. For while the
power of adaptation which continually tries out changing conditions and begins
a new labour with every new generation, almost with every new decade, cannot
make possible the powerfulness of the type; while the total impression
produced by such future Europeans will probably be that of multifarious,
garrulous, weak-willed and highly employable workers who need a master,
a commander, as they need their daily bread; while, therefore, the
democratization of Europe will lead to the production of a type prepared for slavery
in the subtlest sense: in individual and exceptional cases the strong
man will be found to turn out stronger and richer than has perhaps ever
happened before - thanks to the unprejudiced nature of his schooling, thanks to
the tremendous multiplicity of practice, art and mask. What I mean to say is that the
democratization of
243
I
hear with pleasure that our sun is moving rapidly in the direction of the
constellation of Hercules: and I hope that men on the earth will in this
matter emulate the sun. And we at their
head, we good Europeans! -
244
There
was a time when it was usual to call the Germans 'profound', and this was meant
as a term of distinction: now, when the most successful type of the new Germanism thirsts after quite different honours and perhaps
feels that anything profound lacks 'dash', it is almost timely and patriotic to
doubt whether that commendation of former days was not founded on
self-deception: whether German profundity is not at bottom something different
and worse - and something which, thanks be to God, one is on the verge of successfully
getting rid of. Let us therefore try to
learn anew about German profundity: all that is required is a little
vivisection of the German soul. - The German soul is above all manifold, of
diverse origins, put together and superimposed rather than actually
constructed: the reason for that is its source.
A German who would make bold to say 'two souls, alas, within my bosom
dwell' would err very widely from the truth, more correctly he would fall short
of the truth by a large number of souls.
As a people of the most tremendous mixture and mingling of races,
perhaps even with a preponderance of the pre-Aryan element, as the 'people of
the middle' in every sense, the Germans are more incomprehensible, more
comprehensive, more full of contradictions, more unknown, more incalculable,
more surprising, even more frightening to themselves than other people are -
they elude definition and are for that reason alone the despair of the
French. It is characteristic of the
Germans that the question 'what is German?' never dies out among them. Kotzebue certainly
knew his Germans well enough: 'we are known' they cried to him jubilantly - but
Sand too though she knew them.
Jean Paul knew what he was doing when he declared himself incensed by Fichte's mendacious but patriotic flatteries and
exaggerations - but it is likely that Goethe thought otherwise of the Germans
than Jean Paul did, even though he agreed with him about Fichte. What Goethe really thought of the Germans? -
But there were many things round him about which he never expressed himself
clearly and his whole life long he knew how to maintain a subtle silence - he
had no doubt good reason. What is
certain is that it was not 'the Wars of Liberation' which made him look up more
cheerfully, any more than it was the French Revolution - the event on account
of which he rethought his Faust, indeed the whole problem of
'man', was the appearance of Napoleon.
There exist statements by Goethe in which, as if he was from another
country, he condemns with impatient severity that which the Germans take pride
in: the celebrated German Gemüt he once
defined as 'indulgence of others' weaknesses, and one's own'. Was he wrong? - it
is characteristic of the Germans that one is seldom wholly wrong about
them. The German soul has corridors and
interconnecting corridors in it, there are caves, hiding-places, dungeons in
it; its disorder possesses much of the fascination of the mysterious; the
German is acquainted with the hidden paths to chaos. And as everything loves its symbol, the
German loves clouds and all that is obscure, becoming, crepuscular, damp and
dismal: the uncertain, unformed, shifting, growing of
every kind he feels to be 'profound'.
The German himself is not, he is becoming, he is 'developing'.
'Development' is thus the truly German discovery and lucky shot in the
great domain of philosophical formulas - a ruling concept which, in concert
with German beer and German music, is at work at the Germanization
of all
245
The
'good old days' are gone, in Mozart they sang themselves out - how fortunate are
we that his rococo still speaks to us, that his 'good company', his
tender enthusiasm, his child-like delight in chinoiserie
and ornament, his politeness of the heart, his longing for the graceful, the
enamoured, the dancing, the tearful, his faith in the south may still appeal to
some residue in us! Alas, some
day it will be gone - but whom can doubt that
understanding and taste for Beethoven will be gone first! - for
Beethoven was only the closing cadence of a transition of style and stylistic
breach and not, as Mozart was, the closing cadence of a great centuries-old
European taste. Beethoven is the
intermediary between an old mellow soul that is constantly crumbling and a
future over-young soul that is constantly arriving; upon his music there
lies that twilight of eternal loss and eternal extravagant hope - the same
light in which Europe lay bathed when it dreamed with Rousseau, when it danced
around the Revolution's Tree of Liberty and finally almost worshipped before
Napoleon. But how quickly this
feeling is now fading away, how hard it is today even to know of this
feeling - how strange to our ears sounds the language of Rousseau, Schiller,
Shelley, Byron, in whom together the same European destiny that in
Beethoven knew how to sing found its way into words! - Whatever German music
came afterwards belongs to romanticism, that is to say to a movement which was,
historically speaking, even briefer, even more fleeting, even more superficial
than that great interlude, that transition of Europe from Rousseau to Napoleon
and to the rise of democracy. Weber: but
what are Freischütz and Oberon to us
today! Or Marschner's
Hans Heiling and Vampyr! Or even Wagner's Tannhäuser! It is dead, if not yet forgotten, music. All this music of romanticism was, moreover,
insufficiently noble, insufficiently musical, to maintain itself anywhere but
in the theatre and before the mob; it was from the very first second-rate music
to which genuine musicians paid little regard.
It was otherwise with Felix Mendelssohn, that halcyon master who was, on
account of his lighter, purer, happier soul, speedily honoured and just as
speedily forgotten: as the beautiful intermezzo of German music. But as for Schumann, who took things
seriously and was also taken seriously from the first - he was the last to
found a school - : do we not now think it a piece of good fortune, a relief, a liberation that this Schumann-romanticism has been
overcome? Schumann, fleeing into the
'Saxon Switzerland' of his soul, his nature half Werther,
half Jean Paul, not at all like Beethoven, not at all Byronic! - his music for Manfred
is a mistake and misunderstanding to the point of injustice - Schumann, with
his taste which was fundamentally a petty taste (that is to say a
dangerous inclination, doubly dangerous among Germans, for quiet lyricism and
drunkenness of feeling), continually going aside, shyly withdrawing and
retiring, a noble effeminate delighting in nothing but anonymous weal and woe,
a kind of girl and noli me tangere from the first: this Schumann was already a
merely German event in music, no longer a European event, as Beethoven
was, as to an even greater extent Mozart had been - in him German music was
threatened with its greatest danger, that of losing the voice for the soul
of Europe and sinking into a merely national affair.
246
-
What a torment books written in German are for him who has a third
ear! How disgustedly he stands beside
the slowly turning swamp of sounds without resonance, of rhythms that do not
dance, which the Germans call a 'book'!
Not to mention the German who reads books! How lazily, how reluctantly, how badly he
reads! How many Germans know, or think
they ought to know, that there is art in every good sentence - art that
must be grasped if the sentence is to be understood! A misunderstanding of its tempo, for example:
and the sentence itself is misunderstood!
That one must be in no doubt about the syllables that determine the rhythm,
that one should feel the disruption of a too-severe symmetry as intentional and
as something attractive, that one should lend a refined and patient ear to
every staccato, every rubato, that one
should divine the meaning in the sequence of vowels and diphthongs and how
delicately and richly they can colour and recolour
one another through the order in which they come: who among book-reading
Germans has sufficient goodwill to acknowledge such demands and duties and to
listen to so much art and intention in language? In the end one simply 'has no ear for it':
and so the greatest contrasts in style go unheard and the subtlest artistry is squandered
as if on the deaf. - These were my thoughts when I noticed how two masters of
the art of prose were clumsily and unsuspectingly confused with one another:
one from whom words fall cold and hesitantly as from the roof of a damp cavern
- he calculates on the heavy dullness of their sound and echo - and another who
handles his language like a supple blade and feels from his arm down to his
toes the perilous delight of the quivering, over-sharp steel that wants to
bite, hiss, cut. -
247
How
little German style has to do with sound and the ears is shown by the fact that
precisely our good musicians write badly.
The German does not read aloud, does not read for the ear, but merely
with his eyes: he has put his ears away in the drawer. In antiquity, when a man read - which he did
very seldom - he read to himself aloud, and indeed in a loud voice; it was a
matter for surprise if someone read quietly, and people secretly asked
themselves why he did so. In a loud
voice: that is to say, with all the crescendos, inflections, variations of tone
and changes of tempo in which the ancient public world took
pleasure. In those days the rules of
written style were the same as those of spoken style; and these rules depended
in part on the astonishing development, the refined requirements of ear and
larynx, in part on the strength, endurance and power of ancient lungs. A period is, in the sense in which the
ancients understood it, above all a physiological whole, inasmuch as it is
composed by a single breath.
Periods such as appear with Demonsthenes or
Cicero, rising twice and sinking twice and all within a single breath:
these are delights for men of antiquity, who knew from their own
schooling how to value the virtue of them, the rarity and difficulty of the
delivery of such a period - we have really no right to the grand
period, we moderns, we who are short of breath in every sense! For these ancients were one and all
themselves dilettantes in rhetoric, consequently connoisseurs, consequently
critics - and so they drove their orators to extremes; in the same way as, in
the last century, when all Italians and Italiennes
knew how to sing, virtuosity in singing (and therewith also the art of melody -
) attained its height with them. In
248
There
are two kinds of genius: the kind which above all begets and wants to beget,
and the kind which likes to be fructified and to give birth. And likewise there are among peoples of
genius those upon whom has fallen the woman's problem of pregnancy and the
secret task of forming, maturing, perfecting - the Greeks, for example, were a
people of this kind, and so were the French - ; and others who have to fructify
and become the cause of new orders of life - like the Jews, the Romans and, to
ask it in all modesty, the Germans? - peoples tormented and enraptured by
unknown fevers and irresistibly driven outside themselves, enamoured of and
lusting after foreign races (after those which 'want to be fructified') and at
the same time hungry for dominion, like everything which knows itself full of
generative power and consequently 'by the grace of God'. These two kinds of genius seek one another,
as man and woman do; but they also misunderstand one another - as man and woman
do.
249
Every
people has its own tartuffery
and calls it its virtues. - The best that one is one does not know - one cannot
know.
250
What
251
If
a people is suffering and wants to suffer from nationalistic nervous
fever and political ambition, it must be expected that all sorts of clouds and
disturbances - in short, little attacks of stupidity - will pass over its
spirit into the bargain: among present-day Germans, for example, now the
anti-French stupidity, now the anti-Jewish, now the anti-Polish, now the
Christian-romantic, now the Wagnerian, now the Teutonic, now the Prussian (just
look at those miserable historians, those Sybels and Treitschkes, with their thickly bandaged heads - ), and
whatever else these little obfuscations of the German spirit and conscience may
be called. May it be forgiven me that I
too, during a daring brief sojourn in a highly infected area, did not remain
wholly free of the disease and began, like the rest of the world, to entertain
ideas about things that were none of my business: first symptom of the
political infection.
About the Jews, for example: listen. - I have never met a German who was
favourably inclined towards the Jews; and however unconditionally all cautious
and politic men may have repudiated real anti-Jewism,
even this caution and policy is not directed against this class of feeling
itself but only against its dangerous immoderation, and especially against the
distasteful and shameful way in which this immoderate feeling is expressed -
one must not deceive oneself about that.
That Germany has an ample sufficiency of Jews, that the German
stomach, German blood has difficulty (and will continue to have difficulty for
a long time to come) in absorbing even this quantum of 'Jew' - as the Italians,
the French, the English have absorbed them through possessing a stronger
digestion - : this is the clear declaration and language of a universal
instinct to which one must pay heed, in accordance with which one must
act. 'Let in no more Jews! And close especially the doors to the East
(also to
252
They
are no philosophical race - these English: Bacon signifies an attack on
the philosophical spirit in general, Hobbes, Hume, and Locke a debasement and
devaluation of the concept 'philosopher' for more than a century. It was against Hume that Kant rose up;
it was Locke of whom Schelling had a right to
say: 'je méprise Locke';
in their struggle against the English-mechanistic stultification of the world,
Hegel and Schopenhauer were (with Goethe) of one accord: those two hostile
brother geniuses who strove apart towards the antithetical poles of the German
spirit and in doing so wronged one another as only brothers wrong one another.
- What is lacking in
253
There
are truths which are recognized best by mediocre minds because they are most
suited to them, there are truths which possess charm and seductive powers only
for mediocre spirits - one is brought up against this perhaps disagreeable
proposition just at the moment because the spirit of respectable but mediocre
Englishmen - I name Darwin, John Stuart Mill and Herbert Spencer - is starting
to gain ascendancy in the mid-region of European taste. Who indeed would doubt that it is useful for such
spirits to dominate for a while? It
would be a mistake to regard exalted spirits who fly off on their own as
especially well adapted to identifying, assembling and making deductions from a
host of little common facts - as exceptions they are, rather, from the first in
no very favourable position with respect to the 'rules'. After all, they have more to do than merely
know something new - namely to be something new, to signify
something new, to represent new values!
The gulf between knowing and being able is perhaps wider, also more
uncanny, than one thinks: the man who is able in the grand style, the creator,
might possibly have to be ignorant - while, on the other hand, for scientific
discoveries such as Darwin's a certain narrowness, aridity and industrious
conscientiousness, something English in short, may not be an unfavourable disposition.
- Finally, let us not forget that the English, with their profound averageness, have once before brought about a collective
depression of the European spirit: that which is called 'modern ideas' or 'the
ideas of the eighteenth century' or even 'French ideas' - that is to say, that
which the German spirit has risen against in profound disgust - was of
English origin, there can be no doubt about that. The French have been only the apes and actors
of these ideas, also their finest soldiers, also unhappily their first and most
thorough victims: for through the damnable Anglomania
of 'modern ideas' the âme française has finally grown so thin and emaciated that
today one recalls her sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, her profound
passionate strength, her noble inventiveness, almost with disbelief. But one must hang on with one's teeth to this
proposition of historical equity and defend it against the prejudice of the
day: European noblesse - of feeling, of taste, of custom, in short noblesse
in every exalted sense of the word - is the work and invention of France,
European vulgarity, the plebeianism of modern ideas,
that of - England. -
254
Even
now
255
Against
German music I feel all sorts of precautions should be taken. Suppose one loves the south as I love it, as
a great school of convalescence, for all the diseases of senses and spirit, as
a tremendous abundance of sun and transfiguration by sun, spreading itself over
an autonomous existence which believes in itself: well, such a person will
learn to be somewhat on guard against German music because, by spoiling his
taste again, it will also spoil his health again. Such a southerner, not by descent but by faith,
must, if he dreams of the future of music, also dream of the redemption of
music from the north and have in his ears the prelude to a deeper, mightier,
perhaps wickeder and more mysterious music, a supra-German music which does not
fade, turn yellow, turn pale at the sight of the blue voluptuous sea and the
luminous sky of the Mediterranean, as all German music does; a supra-European
music which holds its own even before the brown sunsets of the desert, whose
soul is kindred to the palm-tree and knows how to roam and be at home among
great beautiful solitary beasts of prey.... I could imagine a music whose
rarest magic would consist in this, that it no longer knew anything of good and
evil, except that perhaps some sailors homesickness, some golden shadow and
delicate weakness would now and then flit across it: an art that would see
fleeing towards it from a great distance the colour of a declining, now almost
incomprehensible moral world, and would be hospitable and deep enough to
receive such late fugitives. -
256
Thanks
to the morbid estrangement which the lunacy of nationality has produced and
continues to produce between the peoples of Europe, thanks likewise to the
short-sighted and hasty-handed politicians who are with its aid on top today
and have not the slightest notion to what extent the politics of disintegration
they pursue must necessarily be only an interlude - thanks to all this, and to
much else that is altogether unmentionable today, the most unambiguous signs
are now being overlooked, or arbitrarily and lyingly
misinterpreted, which declare that Europe wants to become one. In all the more profound and comprehensive
men of this century the general tendency of the mysterious workings of their
soul has really been to prepare the way for this new synthesis and to
anticipate experimentally the European of the future: only in their
foregrounds, or in hours of weakness, in old age perhaps, were they among the
'men of the fatherland' - they were only taking a rest from themselves when
they became 'patriots'. I think of men
such as Napoleon, Goethe, Beethoven, Stendhal, Heinrich Heine,
Schopenhauer; I must not be blamed if I also include Richard Wagner among them:
one should not let oneself be misled about him by his own misunderstandings -
geniuses of his sort seldom have the right to understand themselves - and even
less, to be sure, by the unseemly noise with which he is opposed and resisted
today in France: the fact nonetheless remains that French late romanticism
of the forties and Richard Wagner belong most closely and intimately
together. They are related,
fundamentally related, in all the heights and depths of their needs: it is
-
Is this still German?
From
German heart this sultry ululating?
Of
German body this self-lacerating?
German,
this altar-priest prostration,
This incense-perfumed stimulation?
German
this reeling, stumbling, tumbling,
This
muddy booming bim-bam-bumbling,
This
nunnish ogling, Ave-hour-bell chiming,
This false-ecstatic higher-than-heaven climbing?
-
Is this still German? -
Reflect! And then your answer frame:-
For
what you hear is