Richard Wagner (Public doain) |
The diary entries cover only a portion of Mann's life and career. In part one we read entries from 1918 to 1921. The diary then jumps ahead to 1933 and covers the six year preceding the start of World War II.
A bit of personal trivia: The first entry is September 11, which happens to be my birthday.
There are a number of interesting details here beyond the historical context of these two periods in his life. Throughout Mann records what he is reading--Tolstoy, Cervantes, Proust, etc. He also makes note of what times he goes to bed (nearly always after reading a while), what time he wakens (usually 8 a.m.) and what medicines he is taking. He records whom he is corresponding with, and what writing project or projects he is working on.
There are numerous entries devoted to Richard Wagner, whom he writes about and goes on a lecture tour to discuss. What interested me is how divergent his views on Wagner were from Friedrich Nietzche's.
For both Thomas Mann and Friedrich Nietzsche the German composer Richard Wagner was a towering figure in 19th-century European culture. While both thinkers engaged deeply with Wagner’s music and philosophy, their perspectives reflecteddifferent relationships to his legacy and their own evolving philosophies.
* * *
In his early years Nietzsche had been a passionate Wagner enthusiast. Later, however, he became one of Wagner’s most severe critics, devoting a whole book to the guy, The Case of Wagner (1888).
Initially, Nietzsche was captivated by Wagner’s music, seeing in it a revolutionary spirit that resonated with his own philosophical ideals of breaking away from the constraints of bourgeois morality. Nietzsche admired Wagner’s grand operatic visions, particularly the blending of myth, music, and drama to create what Wagner termed the Gesamtkunstwerk (total work of art). Nietzsche saw in Wagner’s early operas, like The Ring of the Nibelung, a reflection of the Dionysian spirit—a celebration of primal, life-affirming forces that Nietzsche explored in his first major work, The Birth of Tragedy (1872).
Friedrich Nietzsche |
By way of contrast Mann admired Wagner and was influenced by his synthesis of music and mythology. Mann appreciated the way Wagner blended Germanic legends with profound philosophical ideas. He saw Wagner's genius and admired his innovations. In his essay The Sorrows and Grandeur of Richard Wagner (1933), Mann grappled with the duality of Wagner’s genius: the grandeur of his artistic vision alongside his troubling associations with German nationalism and proto-fascist ideas. Mann recognized Wagner's flaws while still appreciating his art. Mann was concerned that Wagner's work could be exploited by reactionary forces, a hunch that turned out to be right in the 30's.
The key difference between Nietzsche and Mann’s views on Wagner lies in the depth of their disillusionment. Nietzsche’s break with Wagner was total and deeply personal, stemming from philosophical disillusionment with Wagner’s later works. Mann, while critical of Wagner’s political and moral implications, maintained a more balanced view, appreciating his artistic genius while recognizing his dangerous cultural influence.
As you reflect on your lifetime of interests and passions, what have been your greatest disillusionments? What did you learn from these experiences?
No comments:
Post a Comment