/lit/ - Literature

>>18489576
What the fuck is there to like?

>>18489580
plenty

>>18489576
Wagner was too nationalistic which was viewed as kitsch in those days.

>>18489739
Nationalism was not viewed as kitsch(was that word even a thing then?), it was viewed as progressive and revolutionary ideology. Schopenhauer disliking nationalism was his being a crotchety reactionary. French Revolution, Greek war of independence, and Italian unification and so on were viewed as Nationalist events, they were all supplanting the ancien regime.

Schoppy BTFO'd cringe nationalists

>>18489798
Schopie is here talking about blind nationalism.

>>18489894
national pride*

>As we return home through the palace gardens, he says: “It does not say much for Schopenhauer that he did not pay more attention to my Ring des Nibelungen. I know no other work in which the breaking of a will (and what a will, which delighted in the creation of a world!) is shown as being accomplished through the individual strength of a proud nature without the intervention of a higher grace, as it is in Wotan. Almost obliterated by the separation from Brunnhilde, this will rears up once again, bursts into flame in the meeting with Siegfried, flickers in the dispatching of Waltraute, until, we see it entirely extinguished at the end in Valhalla.” At supper he returns to this and says: “I am convinced Sch. would have been annoyed that I discovered this before I knew about his philosophy—I, a political refugee, the indefensibility of whose theories had been proved by his disciple Kossak on the basis of his philosophy, since my music is supposed to have no melody. But it was not very nice. It’s the way Goethe treated Kleist, whom he should have acclaimed, as Schumann acclaimed Brahms—but that only seems to happen among donkeys.”

>>18489904
In other words:
>Notice me, senpai! Notice me!

Wagner must have been a hard listen for people raised on Italian Art Music.

>>18489576
Wagner fucked Nietzsche’s peachy.

>>18489951
Peachy doesn't rhyme with Nietzsche. Lord spare me from Americans.

>>18489955
You can leave the site then

Schopenhauer hated everything

even a stopped clock is right blah blah blah

>>18489923
This.

>Schopenhauer, as it turns out, had no use—and no ear—for Wagner’s chromatic harmonies. Wagner sent him a beautifully bound copy of the Ring with the inscription, “from respect and gratitude.” The grouchy philosopher was not impressed. He instructed the Swiss journalist, Franz Wille, to convey a message to his friend Wagner: “but tell him that he should stop writing music. His genius is greater as a poet. I, Schopenhauer, remain faithful to Rossini and Mozart.”[3] The response was rude but not surprising, since Schopenhauer, who played the flute (not, like Nietzsche, the piano), was a lover of diatonic catchy tunes.

>>18489576
Wagner was a life-affirmative artist and a greater talent than Schopenhauer, who influenced W a lot. S was unlikely to have known Ws work in depth because he died in 1860; at that point only Lohengrin, Meistersinger and Tanhauser had premiered.
S was a cranky type as per the quote above on the message he sent back to W, but most of all S didn't have time to enjoy W at his most brilliant.

>>18489768
>progressive and revolutionary ideology.

Not so much by his time of writing, and by the time Nietzsche was writing he basically predicted Hitler when he called German Nationalism something for the beer hall plebs.

>>18490016
>tfw never learned music or how to play and instrument
Am I doomed to never really understand philosophy?

>>18490104
What was his reasoning for saying that about nationalism

>>18490092
>Meistersinger

>>18490123
>Die Meistersinger von Nürnberg (WWV 96) ist eine Oper bzw. ein Satyrspiel des Komponisten Richard Wagner in drei Akten nach einem von ihm selbst verfassten Libretto. Die Uraufführung fand am 21. Juni 1868 in München statt. Die Spieldauer beträgt rund 4 ½ Stunden.

>>18490104
>Not so much by his time of writing,
If you mean Schopenhauer then you are just wrong, it was definitely seen that way. Nietzsche, who I am not sure why you're bringing up, also contemned nationalism along basically elitist lines, he thought it was a form of socialism, of weak people clamoring together, resentful and dirty.

>>18490104
Based

>>18490139
>he thought it was a form of socialism, of weak people clamoring together, resentful and dirty.
He was right.

>>18490135
Schopenhauer died in 1860. The only premiered works by Wagner were Rienzi, Die fliegende Hollander, Tannhauser, Lohengrin and the Faust overture.

>>18489576
>Schopenhauer was particularly annoyed, as his vigorous question marks and critical underlinings (sometimes accompanied by multiple exclamation marks) suggest, by Wagner's artificially archaic vocabulary. Nobody but an expert in things medieval would know today, any more than Schopenhauer did then, that a freislicher Streit is a "terrifying quarrel." Nor did infelicitous constructions, stylistic awkwardness, and illogical turns of phrase escape Schopenhauer's angry pencil.

from http://www.wagnersite.nl/Schopenhauer/Arthur.htm

>>18489923
>>18490016
Funny how something so simple is the cause.
Years ago I saw a critic who wrote that gesammtkunstwerk (I don't know the term in english) and novels were considered too new rich for some in the ruling class.

>>18490337
And yet >>18490016

>>18490337
Schopenhauer was filtered.

>>18490337
kek based Schop, as always.
>>18490393
You can't get filtered by mediocrity.

>>18490428
>he thinks Schopenhauer knew more about poetry than Baudelaire, Mallarmé, Verlaine, Nietzsche and Eliot

>>18490092
>Wagner was a life-affirmative
>another Nietzschefag who doesn't know what life affirmation is
It is too tiring anons.

>>18490676
>he thinks Schopenhauer knew more about poetry
Unironically yes. Read 3rd book of WWR1. He is fleshing out Goethe's views but more rigorously and systematically.

>>18490676
Of course he did. He spent several years in the company of Goethe. And Baudelaire himself was highly influenced by Schopenhauer. Not only that whole Decadent literature was based on Schopenhauer's pessimistic philosophy.

>>18489576
He smelled the christcuck in him.

>>18490748
>He smelled the christcuck in him.
What a resentful petulant twat.

>>18490676
Baudelaire just liked the music. He didn't know German and not even German speakers could understand half the shit there. Schop is right in his notes.

>>18490754
Still not as big of an asshole like Wagner who started loudly laughing at the Nietzsche's composition his wife was playing which Nietzsche to sent her on her birthday.

>>18490764
what?

>>18490764
To be fair, why would you send an amateur composition to the wife of a major composer?

>>18490741
>>18490748
>replies have absolutely nothing to do with the fact that great poets have highly regarded Wagner's poetry

>>18490756
>Baudelaire just liked the music.
Not true. He read Wagner in a prose translation into French, and regarded all of his poems as having a "primitive genius" to them, and embodying the mythological. Nietzsche would go on to say a similar thing about Wagner's poetry, but naturally with more knowledge of the original language.

>>18490764
>NOOOOOOOOOOO WAGNER WAS A BIG MEANIE HE MADE A JOKE NOOOOO OMG HOW CAN THIS HAPPEN CANCEL WAGNER RIGHT NOW!!!!!!!!!!

>>18490781
Well, great poets also have lauded Schopenhauer's understanding of poetry. How do you resolve this contradiction?

>>18490764
Wagner, legend

>>18490796
Schopenhauer was wrong? As said above, Goethe wasn't very appreciative of Kleist, nor Holderlin, and Tolstoy didn't like Shakespeare, does that mean we have to inexorably pick one over the other?

Schopenhauer didn't like Wagner's music either and said he was better as a poet than as a composer, would you agree with that as well?

>>18490796
Different people have different views?

>>18490781
>reading poetry in translation
We can safely discard Baudelaire's opinion. Schopenhauer's notes are all about how cringe and uncareful Wagner's language is.
>Schopenhauer didn't like Wagner's music either and said he was better as a poet than as a composer
In the same way that -1 is greater than -2. See: http://www.wagnersite.nl/Schopenhauer/Arthur.htm

>So, would "admiration" for Wagner the poet have been Schopenhauer's last word on the subject? The marginal notes to the Ring in Houghton Library suggest nothing of the sort. Not one of his notations appears favorable, by any stretch of the imagination.

>>18490774
Umm, as a gesture of affection to his friend's wife?
Main point is Wagner was a huge asshole fucking asshole

>>18490790
>>18490796
Shut the fuck up Wagnerfags
I am not a fan of Nietzsche but that laughter was very disrespectful. He could have stayed silent for few minutes but no. His wife also made the decision to perform it and I am sure that she would have felt shitty on her fucking birthday party by his gesture too.

>>18490812
>>18490824

>>18490812
I think there is a proto-modernist experimental aspect to both his poetry and his music that Schopenhauer disliked. That is not to say his work isn't good, but the break that he and others had with the classical norms, I think you would agree, has lead to a disaster today.

>>18490845
Just like Hegel gave us communism, Wagner gave us Rupi Kaur.

>>18490856
Yes, this but unironically.

>>18490824
>We can safely discard Baudelaire's opinion.
Not at all, to recognise some form of "genius" in the poems, even through a 19th century prose translation, unless this translator be a sort of poetic genius, will almost always be a complement to the original. Baudelaire, for example, praises the directness of Wagner's poetry, which shows the undeniable value of Wagner as a writer, being a dramatist. The dramatic and plot structures of Wagner's art (which is more than words alone) show true genius, and how the poetry expresses this, even in prose translations, is self evident.

>Not one of his notations appears favorable, by any stretch of the imagination.
That's a blatant lie, to the lines "Alles ist nach seiner Art: an ihr wirst du nichts ändern" Schopenhauer was very appreciate, writing next to it (paraphrasing) "how true!!!". You've read too many clickbait articles.

>>18490845
This is true, one generation of greats are often at odds with the next, but Baudelaire and like French poets are more to blame for Kaur than Wagner.

>>18490832
Wagner actually left the room quietly but a visitor found him in another room laughing on the floor. It's not like he laughed in front of others.

>>18490845
>>18490856
>>18490897
Rupi's poetry has weird rhythm

https://youtu.be/OrRIXNqJW00

>>18490832
Oh no, poor master Nietzsche.
I think something snapped in Wagner that day. And I don't mean psychologically. More like a revelation. Nietzsche, veiled and inscrutable philosopher. Yet the very same exhibits a childlike lack of awareness, an overconfidence of his own talents. In this little moment, Wagner hears it, and it's funny. The veil was torn.
How is this not the true story of Nietzsche's life? He could've had a military career. Except poor little Nietzsche hurt his chest getting on a horse. Could've been quite the medical orderly. If not for pesky dysentery. Could've been a famed musical composer. If not for that mediocrity. He had talent for philosophy and writing, but absolutely nothing else.

>>18490897
Not really. Baudelaire's influential stuff is mostly lyric poetry (classical alexandrines, etc). Wagner influenced Eliot who then influenced all the Anglo modernists that later gave us Rupi Kaur.

>>18490932
Eliot liked Wagner's poetry, and he quotes it throughout The Waste Land, but I don't think it influenced his own poetry writing. Whereas Baudelaire's poetry influenced all modern poets.

>>18489955
Learn about forced rhymes and forced arseholes.

>>18490951
>Eliot liked Wagner's poetry, and he quotes it throughout The Waste Land, but I don't think it influenced his own poetry writing.
It obviously inflenced him.
>Whereas Baudelaire's poetry influenced all modern poets.
"Modern poets"? What does that even mean? If they influenced they would've written lyric poetry.

kek I love it how when it's about namedropping famous guys who were influeced by Wagner the wagnerfags are all "eliot bla bla" but when it's time to pay for modernism's destruction of recent poetry suddenly it's Baudelaire the lyric poet kek

>>18490985
Alright, then how did Wagner influence Eliot in how he wrote his poetry? Was a capable poet, but I don't think he had any technical influence on poetry. I don't think modern poetry is bad, as there are a lot of great poets between Wagner and Kaur, I just don't think he had much of a technical influence.

>>18490913
>He had talent for philosophy
Not even that. He had talent for oratory, I give him that, but not philosophy.

>>18490901
Kek this is even funnier

Wagner was an artistic genius that was very lacking as a personality. Schopie had a strong dislike of weak and vain characters and thus didnt like Wagner.

>>18491008
>>18491008
>only exactly technical influence matters
Wagner's influence on Eliot was paramount but more spiritual and aesthetic than purely technical. "But at their first meeting in 1956, Stravinsky thought ‘Eliot’s Wagner nostalgia . . . apparent’ and recalled Eliot as implying that ‘Tristan must have been one of the most passionate experiences in his life’"
> I don't think modern poetry is bad
Modern means contemporary. Not sure if you mean modernist, as in from Modernism, which was good when it was in talented hands. But modern/contemporary is BAD.

>>18491108
>Wagner's influence on Eliot was paramount but more spiritual and aesthetic than purely technical.
That's what I meant, I thought you were referring to crappy modern poetry (like Kaur) because it lacked all technical skill and modernist poets led to that breakdown of form. Do you mean that the subject of Wagner's poetry is blameable for this denigration of poetry? Otherwise I don't understand.

>Modern means contemporary. Not sure if you mean modernist, as in from Modernism, which was good when it was in talented hands. But modern/contemporary is BAD.
Modern as in modernist, ending with people like Pound and going into untalented hands.

>>18491085
>very lacking as a personality.
The only bad thing he did was steal other men's wives.

>>18491108
>>18491177
I think blaming this or that person for this colossal collapse would be pointless at this point. The original point was that Schopenhauer criticized him for his unorthodox poetry and music. It's worth noting that aside from the poetry, his influence in music also lead to atonality.

>>18491221
>It's worth noting that aside from the poetry, his influence in music also lead to atonality.
That is debatable. He led music to the period where atonality came out of, but atonality wasn't a necessary musical ideology to come out of that. Liszt was bordering and sometimes divulging into atonality after Wagner died but it was always tasteful, therefore it can't be called "atonality", and nothing like the abstract intention of Schoenberg. Schoenberg as an individual and later movement is what ruined music, whereas Wagner influenced almost all 20th century composers, including great ones like Strauss or Mahler. Contrary to the idea that he was reacting against the classical tradition, he was pushing it to its limits and should for this be recognised as a champion of classical music, in opposition to Schoenberg.

>>18491221
>his influence in music also lead to atonality.
Beethoven led to Wagner. Haydn led to Beethoven. Bach led to Haydn. Luther lead to Bach. The Pope lead to Luther. Peter lead to the Pope. Jesus lead to Peter. We can thusly conclude that our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ is what led to atonality.

>>18491279
Everything goes back to Middle East, fucking crazy.

>>18491279
Please spare me the humor. I am not just dropping names. Wagner pushing chromaticism to its limits and messing with tonal centers is what led people like Schoenberg to reject tonality altogether. I am not the first person to link Wagner to Schoenberg.
>>18491266
As I said, it's pointless to attribute blame to anyone now. It is obvious in what way he inspired Schoenberg. Could it have gone some other way? Perhaps, but it didn't.

>>18491317
There is truth in humor. If you are going to link Wagner to Schoenberg then you should add Beethoven to the mix for without his influence, Wagner would likely never have been a composer. Brahms was equally as influential on Schoenberg. If anyone is to blame, it's Beethoven.

>>18491279
Based and ad absurdum pilled.

>>18491331
Perhaps, but Beethoven didn't use extreme chromaticism and he didn't mess with tonal centers, though Wagner did.

>>18491364
Yes but he did consciously break from classicism and that revolutionary streak inspired Brahms and Wagner in their respective ways.

>>18491364
Not the anon you're replying to, but all of the musical radicals in Romanticism, Berlioz, Liszt and Wagner specifically, were a direct reaction to, and in many ways further development of, things in Beethoven. Wagner obviously being the most original.

>>18491388
>>18491392
I'm not going to argue against determinism. Only to identify a link in the chain, Wagner had a not insignificant role. My original point was this was the same aspect of Wagner that Schopenhauer disliked.

>>18490092
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lQNcTYVlcEg
This shit is uglier than the worst pop music.

>>18490676
>Nietzsche
>poetry
Oh no no no

>>18490764
Why was he so retarded?

>>18489798
This is legitimately a stupid point of view. What a horrible little man he must have been.

>>18490912
Wtf is this?

>>18491417
>My original point was this was the same aspect of Wagner that Schopenhauer disliked.
This is true. Schopenhauer (along with Goethe) preferred music typically before Beethoven as well. Quoting Wagner's Beethoven essay:

>The two [Schiller and Goethe] also came together in their notion of the nature of music; but this idea in Schiller’s case went deeper than with Goethe. As would be expected, Goethe concentrated on the agreeable and visually symmetrical in art music, the element by which music in turn is analogous to architecture. Schiller had a more profound understanding of the problem: his view, which Goethe also shared, was that the epic was closer to the visual arts while drama was closer to music. It is also consistent with our previous judgement of these poets: that Schiller was more successful in actual drama, while Goethe unmistakably preferred the epic form.

Schopenhauer had more of an appreciation for "the visually symmetrical" in music.

>>18489798
Retarded.

>>18491574
Miserable fucking fool.

he was a jelly offspringlet

>>18491724

>>18491738
That 14 year symphonic work is superior to all Wagner shit

>>18491763
Brahms would disagree.

>>18491738
This meme makes Brahms more likable than Wagner.

>>18489798
I'm sure Schopenhauer would not have approved of mass import of muslims and other 3rd world hordes.1848 he supported the government against revolutionaries.

>>18491842
His philosophy and how he lived were totally opposite.

>>18491854
So supporting commie revolutionaries would be in line with his philosophy?

Wagner repented for his involvement in the 1848 revolutions.

>17 June 1879. Richard explains to the children the consequences of the (civil) emancipation of the Jews, how the bourgeoisie by this means was depressed and the lesser people seduced into corruption. The Revolution (of 1848) shattered feudalism and in its place introduced mammonism.

>>18489798
National pride is clearly what we would call patriotism in this context though. He is not attacking nationalism as such or the idea that the nation should be the basis for politics and its participants.

>>18490913
Go outside occasionally, kid.

>>18491856
false dichotomy

>>18491738
Brahms sounds like a proper lad. Wagner sounds like opportunist filth.

>>18490810
Wagner, asshole.

>>18492283
>>18492290
Okay, dork.

>>18490832
Why would you send something ever to your friends' wife? lol

>>18489951
>Nietzsche’s peaches
ftfy

>>18492453
Okay, cunt.

>>18490901
Jesus Christ, Wagner was an absolute unit.

>>18491856
A pessimist would just say No to the world and slip into the darkness silently.

>>18489576
>Wagner
Kitsch

>>18492880
>t. Jew

>>18492919
>You're a jew if you don't like my kitsch artist
do wagnerfags really...?

>>18489798

lol ok, and the intelekshuly superior individualist gets BTFO by the first collective that comes along

>>18493018
"Kitsh" is a word introduced and used by Jews who couldn't into German art. They would even call Goethe kitch kek.

>>18492919
take your meds

>>18493273
>"Kitsh" is a word introduced and used by Jews who couldn't into German art.
Not true, revisionistfag.
>They would even call Goethe kitch kek.
Lies. Just accept that Fagner is a kitschlord. Nothing wrong about that.

>>18490107
Yes