Did Wagner successfully revive Greek tragedy in Germany?

[Anonymous No.16270166]

[Anonymous No.16270172]

>>16270166
Yes. I assume you've read Nietzsche's Birth of Tragedy?

[Anonymous No.16270180]

Yes. Also religious themes in composition. It's funny how much that infuriated Neetch

[Anonymous No.16270185]

>>16270172
Didn't he go back on that? But I do find it interesting that Wagner chiefly chose the unification of essentially word and music to achieve this, which is also the central means of criticism for whenever the question is raised if Wagner revived Greek tragedy, "too vain an endeavour to unify word and music" they say.

[Anonymous No.16270197]

>>16270185
>Didn't he go back on that?
Yes, but does it matter? The work and the arguments stand on their own, regardless of the author's personal quarrels.

[Anonymous No.16270250]

>>16270180
Well I mean Wagner first wrote his conception of the Gesammtkunstwerk onto paper as a revolutionary, and completely rejected Christianity for the Greeks, and also funnily enough had some closely Nietzschean ideas of the fulfilment of the "life-need" in the senses and purely "physical"(the German meaning is far broader than the materialism it might seem to infer). But after finding Schopenhauer shortly after these writings it is clear such views on Christianity or the senses did not last.

However we can also see his aim for something very similar to the Gesammkunstwerk as early as 1840, prior to any revolutionary mindset, in "A Pilgrimage to Beethoven", he has Beethoven talk about his attempt to raise word up to the level of music using such a great poem as Schiller's, though not completely achieving it. It is also well known that Wagner already held the 9th Symphony as an ideal for his future art since a very young age.

[Anonymous No.16270254]

>>16270197
Well one could easily say the same about his rejection of it.

[Anonymous No.16270313]

>>16270254
Surely we don't consider the merits of arguments based on the author's personal feelings? Regardless of what late Nietzsche might have said, the work on its own is compelling. If I wanted to give a crude outline of the work, in the first half he tries to explain Greek tragedy from the lens of a Schopenhauerian aesthetician. In the second half, he argues since Wagner is doing the same thing, a revival of the same Greek attitude might be on its way. It's short and well-written. I think you might find it relevant to the topic.

[Anonymous No.16270321]

>>16270254
Surely we don't consider the merits of arguments based on the author's personal feelings? Regardless of what late Nietzsche might have said, the work on its own is compelling. If I wanted to give a crude outline of the work, in the first half he tries to explain Greek tragedy from the lens of a Schopenhauerian aesthetician. In the second half, he argues since Wagner is doing the same thing as the Greek tragedians were doing, a revival of the same Greek attitude might be on its way. It's short and well-written. I think you might find it relevant to the topic.

[Anonymous No.16270391]

>>16270321
>Surely we don't consider the merits of arguments based on the author's personal feelings?
I meant that Nietzsche went back on it philosophically anon. If we are supposing it has merit, my point was only that surely there was a bigger reason why Nietzsche went back on it than feelings.

[Anonymous No.16270406]

>>16270391
As far as I'm aware, the chief reason was his break from Schopenhauer, since the work uses explicitly Schopenhauerian premises. Now, since Nietzsche renounced Schopenhauer, does this mean we should have to do the same thing?

[Anonymous No.16270477]

>>16270406
No, but it would not be right to say the work renounces Nietzsche in itself. Surely there is a considerable reason for Nietzsche's rejection of some of his ideas in it, rather than blanketed "he was a Schopenhauerian", "then he was not a Schopenhauerian so rejected it".

[Anonymous No.16270584]

>ELIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIZABEEEEEEETH

[Anonymous No.16270829]

>>16270584
I don't get it.

[Anonymous No.16271259]

>>16270829
tannhauser

[Anonymous No.16271272]

>>16270166
>*walks up behind him*
>*slaps him on the back of the head*
>erm... nice cowlick, Alfalfa!

[Anonymous No.16271279]

>>16270166
nesun dorma lalalalaaaaaaloailolalooo

[Anonymous No.16271285]

>>16270250
didn't Wagner and his wife laugh at Nietzsche's attempts to compose music? sounds like a comfy evening to bond desu

[Anonymous No.16271304]

>>16270584
>HEINRICH, YOU ARE REDEEMED

[Anonymous No.16271312]

>>16271285
Nietzsche sent it as a birthday/Christmas gift to Cosima I believe, she performed for some guests but Wagner left before the end, another guest found him rolling around on the floor laughing.

[Anonymous No.16271325]

>>16271312
damn. no wonder he went insane

[Anonymous No.16271326]

>>16271312
kek based

[Anonymous No.16271349]

>Herzeleide dies of grief

[Anonymous No.16271431]

>tfw your whole country is a venusburg

[Anonymous No.16271439]

How do I even start with Wagner?

[Anonymous No.16271442]

How do I even start with Wagner? I’ve no clue where to begin or go from there.

[Anonymous No.16271452]

>>16271442
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2IjJXVY4j7U
TRIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIISTAN

[Anonymous No.16271456]

>>16271439
>>16271442
Tannhauser
Lohengrin
Ring Cycle
Meistersinger
Tristan und Isolde
Parsifal

In that order
also read his writings, they are not too long

[Anonymous No.16271501]

>>16271439
>>16271456
>Ring Cycle that early
Woah easy there, you should start with and focus on these:

>Tannhauser
>Lohengrin
>Die Meistersinger
>Rienzi

After you feel you understand what Wagner was trying to do you can go with Tristan, the Ring etc.

[Anonymous No.16271726]

>>16271439
literally just listed to the music lmao

[Anonymous No.16271799]

>>16271439
This:

https://youtu.be/dzeNnoMmsjM?t=4073