/lit/ - Literature

Why doesn't Wagner get any credit as a writer? Most 20th century drama is merely derivative of him, Artaud, Brecht, etc.

Books advocating for vegetarianism?

>>19749932
>It was a weighty feature of the Christian Church, that none but sound and healthy persons were admitted to the vow of total world-renunciation; any bodily defect, not to say mutilation, unfitted them. Manifestly this vow was to be regarded as issuing from the most heroic of all possible resolves, and he who sees in it a "cowardly self-surrender"—as someone recently suggested [Nietzsche],—may bravely exult in his own self-retention, but had best not meddle any further with things that don't concern him.

Is the Ring a Marxist, Fascist, Hegelian, Schopenhauerian, Feuerbachian, Humanist, White supremacist, Revolutionary or Conservative work?

>>18896019
Wagner btfod Nietzsche with innuendos.

>It was a weighty feature of the Christian Church, that none but sound and healthy persons were admitted to the vow of total world-renunciation; any bodily defect, not to say mutilation, unfitted them. Manifestly this vow was to be regarded as issuing from the most heroic of all possible resolves, and he who sees in it a "cowardly self-surrender"—as someone recently suggested [Nietzsche],—may bravely exult in his own self-retention, but had best not meddle any further with things that don't concern him.

and again

>To what is the preacher bound fast in the pulpit, but to compromises between the utmost contradictions, whose subtleties must necessarily confound our very faith itself and make us ask: Who now knows Jesus?—Historical criticism, perchance? It casts in its lot with Judaism, and, just like every Jew, it wonders that the bells on Sunday morn should still be ringing for a Jew once crucified two thousand years ago.

Obviously a reply to the 113th aphorism of "Human, All too Human" with these very words:— "On a Sunday morning, when we hear the old bells booming, we ask ourselves: Is it possible that this should be for a Jew, crucified two thousand years ago, who said he was the son of God? The proof of such an assertion is wanting."

>>18758920
Did Nietzsche forget about Wagner?

>>18547620
Wagner btfod Nietzsche with innuendos.

>It was a weighty feature of the Christian Church, that none but sound and healthy persons were admitted to the vow of total world-renunciation; any bodily defect, not to say mutilation, unfitted them. Manifestly this vow was to be regarded as issuing from the most heroic of all possible resolves, and he who sees in it a "cowardly self-surrender"—as someone recently suggested [Nietzsche],—may bravely exult in his own self-retention, but had best not meddle any further with things that don't concern him.

and again

>To what is the preacher bound fast in the pulpit, but to compromises between the utmost contradictions, whose subtleties must necessarily confound our very faith itself and make us ask: Who now knows Jesus?—Historical criticism, perchance? It casts in its lot with Judaism, and, just like every Jew, it wonders that the bells on Sunday morn should still be ringing for a Jew once crucified two thousand years ago.

Obviously a reply to the 113th aphorism of "Human, All too Human" with these very words:— "On a Sunday morning, when we hear the old bells booming, we ask ourselves: Is it possible that this should be for a Jew, crucified two thousand years ago, who said he was the son of God? The proof of such an assertion is wanting."

>>18536668

>>18344397
Explain his relationship with Wagner.