Nietzschean Configurations
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
University of Alberta Nietzschean Configurations Johannes Frederik Welfing 0 A thesis submitted to the Faculty of Graduate Studies and Research in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Comparative Literature Department of Comparative Studies in Literature, Religion, Film and Media Studies Edmonton, Alberta Spring 1999 National Library Bibliothaue nationale 1+1 of,", du Canada Acquisitions and Acquisitions et Bibliographic Setvices services bibliographiques 395 Wellington Street 395. rue Wellington Ottawa ON KIA ON4 Ottawa ON K1A ON4 Canada Canada The author has granted a non- L'auteur a accorde me licence non exclusive licence allowing the exclusive permettant a la National Library of Canada to Bibliotheque nationale du Canada de reproduce, loan, distribute or sell reproduire, preter, distribuer ou copies of this thesis in microform, vendre des copies de cette these sous paper or electronic formats. la foxme de microfiche/^ de reproduction su.papier ou sur format Bectronique. The author retains ownership of the L'auteur conserve la propriete du copyright in this thesis. Neither the droit d'auteur qui protege cette these. thesis nor substantial extracts fkom it Ni la these ni des extraits substantiels may be printed or otherwise de celle-ci ne doivent &e imprimes reproduced without the author's ou autrement reproduits sans son permission. autorisation. Opgedragen aan mijn lieve vader en mijn lieve moeder. Hun steun blijft altijd. Abstract The following is an analysis of the diversity in Nietzsche interpretation. I will focus on both Nietzsche's text and its reception, and will attempt to establish that both sides are responsible for the many configurations at hand. The first chapter is an introductory account of some of the difficulties in Nietzsche interpretation. While focusing on problems such as concepts, style and structure in the Nietzsche text, the analysis exposes the large variety of Nietzsche interpretation itself; while moving away from the difficulty of the text, it attempts to demonstrate that the different interpretations, rather than referring to Nietzsche and his writing, are first and foremost indicative of the methodological stance of the interpreters themselves. The following chapter proposes a classification of critics according to the degree in which Nietzsche is thought to transcend the traditional boundaries of the metaphysical tradition. The second part of this chapter raises the question of a Nietzschean inconsistency in the Nietzsche text itself on the question of metaphysics. The third chapter deals with the question of the Dionysian in both Nietzsche and others, and examines the extent to which this notion has changed in Nietzsche. The final three chapters are examples of Nietzsche interpretation. The first and second part of this final section focus on literary appropriations of Nietzsche. While problematizing the more traditional notions and assumptions that underlie the exercise of influence, I intend to show in these chapters how appropriation of a Nietzschean premise takes place in a work of literature. The first chapter of the second part focuses on Andre Gide and Hermann Hesse, authors whose literary production takes place under the imperative of a modernist aesthetic. The second deals with Milan Kundera, often referred to as a postmodern writer and thinker. The final chapter focuses on Jacques Derrida, and his intricate and rather playful style of Nietzsche interpretation. By moving away from a traditional type of philosophical investigation, Derrida's analysis evolves along the fine line that separates philosophy from fiction, seriousness from play, or truth from artistic creation. Acknowledgment I would like to thank Professor Edward Mozejko and Pad Morris, two people who have been crucial to the successful completion of my degree. The German equivalent of 'supervisor' is Doktorvater; Professor Mozejko was precisely this: more ein Doktorvater than supervisor. And Paul, well, what can I say? A friend and mentor from the day I set foot on Canadian soil. A special thanks also to the members of my committee: Professors Bortolussi, Burch, Dimic, Pylypiuk and Krysinsky. And also to George, as Chair of the exam. Table of Contents Introduction The diversity of Nietzsche Interpretation ........................................... 1 Chapter one: On the Fluidity of Nietzsche's Writing: Nietzsche as Prism .....................................................................9 The concepts: The self-consumption of Mapus. Stewart and Mileur .........1 7 Style and thought: Jaspers and Derrida: Transcendence and joke ........... -26 The structure and composition: split versus lump ................................. 40 Chapter two: Nietzsche and his Critics: The Question of Metaphysics ........................................................ 55 The first category: Nietzsche as one among the many ............................ 59 The second category: Nietzsche as the "true and only one" ..................... .64 The controversy ....................................................................... -69 Nietzsche and the Knowledge of the Child at Play ................................ -72 Nietzsche's instinctive knowledge .................................................... 90 Chapter three: Dionysus' Fluidity: Nietzsche and the Different Conceptions of the Dionysian ....................... 97 Nietzsche's primeval rape ............................................................118 The difficulties of appropriation ..................................................... 123 Other versions of the Dionysian ...................................................... 141 Nietzsche's Lebensbejahung and sense of play ...................................-147 A Dionysian Current: Desire and the exotic in Gide and Burroughs An analysis............................................................................. -154 The gaze of desire in Queer and Si le Grain ne Meurt ............................ 165 Chapter four: Hermann Hesse and Andre Gide: The Trace. the Mentor and the Pupil ................................................. 172 Gide. Hesse and Nietzsche: a similar mindset: Fruits. subversion and trickery ......................................................... 1 84 The mentor and his daimon:fuhren and veflihren ..................................197 Nietzschean traces ....................................................................... -215 Chapter five: Friedrich Nietzsche and Milan Kundera: A Polyphonous Sound ................................................................ -234 On irony and ambiguity. the lack of authorial guidance And the indeterminacy of the child as philosophical concept ..................... 237 A set of common preoccupations: The novel as a collection of aphorisms ............................................... 260 Philosophical terminology ............................................................... 268 Ethical concerns: the remedy of slow investigation................................. 274 Nietzsche and Kundera: the differences Playful reversal of a Nietzschean premise ............................................ 283 Chapter six: Derrida and Nietzsche: The Consistency of Method and the Postponement of Understanding ........... 292 The Nietzschean model The radical Bentham.. .................................................................. -299 Derrida's interpretive method: a Nietzschean method ...............................315 "Otobiography" .......................................................................... -318 Spurs and "Signatures" .................................................................-328 A few reservations ........................................................................334 Conclusion............................................................................... -339 Bibliography ..............................................................................347 INTRODUCTION The diversity of Nietzsche interpretation In his study on Wittgenstein, the Dutch author and critic Willem Frederik Hermans makes a distinction between scientific treatises and those that belong to the discipline of philosophy. While the former deal with a more detached type of material, the latter are inevitably more personal. The scientific premises of a Newton or an Einstein, while maintaining their status as truth, are liable to be incorporated in a theory that either develops or surpasses them. The scientific truth, according to Hermans, is able to withstand the appropriative act of the interpreter that uses it better than its philosophical counterpart. About the philosophers's "creations," Hermans states that "[they] may have the pretension of being (...) part of a large, all-inclusive science, which is philosophy, yet that in reality these creations have nothing more in common than Les Fleurs du Mal and The Brothers Kararnazov. That they are no more part of one, universal Building as the Dome of Cologne and the Stock Exchange of ~erla~e."' Hemans speaks of philosophers in terms of "poets" and "novelists," and of their creations as a very personal set of truths that resist incorporation into a theory that is not their own. If introduced nonetheless, these truths change. To h he quote reads: (...) fiIosofen (...) Ieven naasr ekaar als dichters of romanschrijvers, in hoogsl persoonlijke scheppingen, die we1 pretenderen met elkaar sarnen te hangen, die we1 bedoeld zijn als onderdeel van een grote, dies overkoepeIende wetenschap: de filosofie,