/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.17228199]

Who won?

[Anonymous No.17228215]

me

[Anonymous No.17228261]

[Anonymous No.17228413]

>>17228199
Consider their physiognomy. The answer is obvious.

[Anonymous No.17228427]

Parsifal BTFO Nietzsche

[Anonymous No.17228444]

>>17228427
Didnt watch it. How so?

[Anonymous No.17228474]

Wagner's music is just bad. Theatrical, boisterous, operatic, showmanlike. Big crashing cymbals and strings to pack the tawdry seats of opera-halls. I doubt any of his Nazi fanbois even listen to it. And Nietzsche certainly knew better than to listen to that crap.

Mahler, on the other hand, (and Strauss as well) displays the characteristics of a true Overman of the arts.

[Anonymous No.17228481]

>>17228444
>Friedrich Nietzsche, who was originally one of Wagner's champions, chose to use Parsifal as the grounds for his breach with Wagner; an extended critique of Parsifal opens the third essay ("What Is the Meaning of Ascetic Ideals?") of On the Genealogy of Morality. In Nietzsche contra Wagner he wrote:

>Parsifal is a work of perfidy, of vindictiveness, of a secret attempt to poison the presuppositions of life – a bad work. The preaching of chastity remains an incitement to anti-nature: I despise everyone who does not experience Parsifal as an attempted assassination of basic ethics.

>Despite this attack on the subject matter, he also admitted that the music was sublime: "Moreover, apart from all irrelevant questions (as to what the use of this music can or ought to be) and on purely aesthetic grounds; has Wagner ever done anything better?" (Letter to Peter Gast, 1887).

[Anonymous No.17228579]

>>17228481
I love Nietzsche but you can't take what he says as ex cathedra. Case in point.

[Anonymous No.17228633]

>>17228481
I really hate his obnoxious use of hyperbole that he adopted later in life.

[Anonymous No.17228643]

>>17228474
Mahler, yes; Strauss, certainly not.

[Anonymous No.17228687]

>>17228474
>Wagner's music is just bad. Theatrical, boisterous, operatic, showmanlike. Big crashing cymbals and strings to pack the tawdry seats of opera-halls. I doubt any of his Nazi fanbois even listen to it. And Nietzsche certainly knew better than to listen to that crap.
This is literally exactly what Wagner was reacting against. It's an uneducated opinion par excellence, and as if you want to agree with Nietzsche more than you want to understand Wagner, or truth at all. Because of your tin and musically uneducated ear you hear a few cymbals or triangles and think it's just there to wow the senses.

[Anonymous No.17228694]

>>17228413
It's quite funny.
Nietzsche is a chinlet but the massive moustache helps to hide it.
Ugly man, ugly ideology.

[Anonymous No.17228738]

>>17228643
Why not Strauss?

[Anonymous No.17228743]

>>17228694
The physiognomy answers it all.

[Anonymous No.17228745]

He had a normal chin, he just had too much face to fill.

[Anonymous No.17228751]

>>17228743
If a man has a strong jawline and chin, then he's right.

[Anonymous No.17228754]

>>17228745
He was gaunter later in life which made the mustache look even bigger.

[Anonymous No.17228755]

>>17228743
Ugly chin, ugly nose. Nietzsche wins yet again.

[Anonymous No.17228758]

>>17228745
Come on, that's a recessed chin.
If he was born in current year + 6 then he'd be lookmaxxing fag weeping over his chinlet status.

[Anonymous No.17228762]

>>17228754

[Anonymous No.17228771]

>>17228755
Cope.

[Anonymous No.17228772]

>>17228758
Pretty normal chin. The lookmaxxing idiots have a distorted view of beauty. A chin that juts out like Wagner's is not very attractive.

[Anonymous No.17228797]

This is a Wagner board. Nietfags fuck off.

[Anonymous No.17228799]

>>17228758
His chin is leveled with his brow. Course everyone would look like a chinlet compared to Wagner or Charles the Bewitched. Neetch had a large but otherwise normal face.

He was fat in that picture. Fat people's (real) chin is less pronounced.

[Anonymous No.17228850]

>>17228772
>>17228799
cope

[Anonymous No.17228885]

>>17228745

He looks overweight in this pic

[Anonymous No.17228953]

>>17228474
>Mahler, on the other hand, (and Strauss as well) displays the characteristics of a true Overman of the arts.
nah, that's Scriabin (PBUH)

[Anonymous No.17228960]

>>17228413
This.

[Anonymous No.17228968]

>>17228745
It's the terrible hair + bad picture. He probably looked better and was most likely just a mentalcel (ironic)
>t. I look a bit like him but worse and can get laid

[Anonymous No.17229060]

>>17228762
why does this feel so haunting to look at

[Anonymous No.17229080]

Nietzsche won.
He BTFO Wagner eternally by exposing his petit bourgeois nationalism as the central motivation of his art.

Nietzsche on the other side still makes millions of people seethe helplessly

[Anonymous No.17229089]

>>17229060
Maybe because its a candid photo and shows the man himself laid bare as opposed to a carefully arranged portrait, which we are accustomed to.

[Anonymous No.17229092]

>>17228633
you got Nietzsche'd

[Anonymous No.17229111]

>>17228199
Nietzsche because Hitler lost

[Anonymous No.17229117]

>>17228199
Chadner obviously

[Anonymous No.17229121]

>>17229111
Mussolini lost too though.

[Anonymous No.17229122]

>>17229121
Hitler was far more of a Wagnerian than Mussolini a Nietzschean

[Anonymous No.17229129]

>>17229122
Nietzsche is what single handedly deconverted mussolini from socialism though.

[Anonymous No.17229145]

>>17228474
kek, even from a famous Christian theologian pov:

In his book The Beauty of the Infinite: The Aesthetics of Christian Truth, Hart discusses the language of beauty, the Triune God, and Creation. He states that the Christian understanding of Creation as beauty and gift, as the outward expression of the delight the Trinity has in itself, reveals a vision of reality different from the pagan or fatalist vision of reality. In an effort to explain this latter vision and to elucidate the difference between it and the former, Hart contrasts the music of Richard Wagner (1813-1883), which he cites as an example of the pagan or fatalist vision of reality, with that of J. S. Bach (1685-1750), his example of the Christian vision of reality. Whereas Wagner's music has to end when and how it does, Bach's music contains infinite possibility and could have ended (if he had been immortal) in any number of fashions. Hart adds that Bach's music further demonstrates the Christian vision of reality in how it accounts for dissonance; the music makes room for it, he states, without degenerating into mere discord.

[Anonymous No.17229203]

>>17229145
Ironic that Niet preferred Bach

[Anonymous No.17229218]

>>17228687
What are the triangles for?

[Anonymous No.17229233]

>>17228199
Is that one of those virgin vs chad images?

[Anonymous No.17229234]

>>17229203
not even devout atheists like neetcha can resist bach(pbuh)

[Anonymous No.17229302]

>>17229060
You can see the crazy.

[Anonymous No.17229334]

>>17229080
truth

[Anonymous No.17229362]

>>17229234
Is it just me or does Bach give off a much more “folksy” or “rustic” aura as opposed to the more mechanical, clean-cut sound of his contemporaries like Handel?

[Anonymous No.17229433]

>>17229218
they make tinkly ding-a-ling sounds for fatalistic pagan ears

[Anonymous No.17229515]

>>17229122
Hitler was also more nietzschean than wagnerian & more nietzschean than Mussolini anyways

[Anonymous No.17229517]

>>17229433
Seriously, though?

[Anonymous No.17229529]

>the weak and ill-constituted shall perish

[Anonymous No.17229538]

>>17229111
>Hitler lost
so did Siegfried

[Anonymous No.17229542]

>>17229529
Not that he’s wrong, but those words are just a bit funny coming from a sickly little scamp like Niet.

[Anonymous No.17229547]

>>17229529
everybody perishes desu

[Anonymous No.17229550]

>>17228199
wagner wrote philosphy? am brainlet so help me understand. i thought he wrote music

[Anonymous No.17229556]

>>17229080

[Anonymous No.17229564]

>>17228771
Unbelievable. Wagner wins hands down

[Anonymous No.17229570]

>>17229538
poor one out for my nigga Hitla
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a53s4jyCqqU

[Anonymous No.17229574]

>>17229550
no, Nietzsche wrote music

https://youtu.be/FIOIUlDB5yU

[Anonymous No.17229579]

Nietzche's facial hair was based
Wagner's facial hair was cringe
simple as

[Anonymous No.17229580]

>>17228771
I’d let him mating press me tbqh.

[Anonymous No.17229581]

>>17229302
Nah bro he just took a fat DMT pull.

[Anonymous No.17229587]

>>17228771
>manlet

[Anonymous No.17229602]

>>17229542
>muh sick
>hurr he was not Superman durr
It's weird how it gets barely mentioned that he was not only a revolutionary thinker, but also a veteran of the franco-prussian wars, a poet & a composer
and other thinkers get never hold to that standard

[Anonymous No.17229606]

>>17229587
Oh my fucking god...

[Anonymous No.17229625]

>>17229606
lmao little big boi schubert over on the right

[Anonymous No.17229630]

>>17229542
He was an avid hiker and supposedly enjoyed his Time in the mountains when his health could be afforded for such activities.

Pic semi unrelated

[Anonymous No.17229644]

>>17229570

[Anonymous No.17229659]

>>17228199
Nietzsche, because he has the better memes

[Anonymous No.17229671]

>>17229659
all these memes are created by a German autist who frequents Kraut/pol/. he is the most autistic person on all of /pol/.

[Anonymous No.17229679]

>>17229671
kek

[Anonymous No.17229709]

An aesthetically sound mind should come to the conclusion that Nietzsche's books are better than Wagner's music is.
That anon spams him incessantly on a literature board just goes to show what kind of glory wagnerians get.

[Anonymous No.17229711]

>>17228687
Bach & Liszt are clearly superior

[Anonymous No.17229744]

>>17229547
desu

[Anonymous No.17229753]

>>17228953
read his notebooks if you haven't

I love this nigga so much, in 40 years he perfected the "chopinian" piano style and then made beautiful mystic music

[Anonymous No.17229762]

>>17229753
But Chopin is overrated

[Anonymous No.17229780]

>>17228885

>i heard you were talking mad shit about me like some faggot ass nigga?

[Anonymous No.17229782]

>>17229362
depends on the music

the whole Orgelbüchlein feels mechanical, but the cantatas are more folksy

still, he wasn't one of those composers who would take folkloric elements, few was a cosmopolitan one, in the sense that he combined the main European styles of his moment

in comparison, Handel's music is much more homophonic and simple, and I haven't felt it mechanical (though I don't like him that much either)

[Anonymous No.17229799]

wagner didn't even wrote half as good as Nietzsche composed

that's a fact

[Anonymous No.17229805]

>>17228215
fpbp actually

[Anonymous No.17229806]

>>17229550
wagner wrote philosophy and music critiques, haven't read them

Nietzsche wrote music that was pretty bad

[Anonymous No.17229814]

>>17229806
>Nietzsche wrote music that was pretty bad
show me your better compositions or stfu

https://youtu.be/WL0eHOcB18g

[Anonymous No.17229837]

>>17228738
Strauss is absolutely epic, Wagnerfags are seething

[Anonymous No.17229842]

>>17229837
But I thought Wagnerfags like Strauss because he’s basically Wagner II.

[Anonymous No.17229848]

>>17229574
this is fucking based.

[Anonymous No.17229855]

>>17229842
yes, but actually no
https://www.bitchute.com/video/k0ckI5bGYNqG/

[Anonymous No.17229879]

>>17229762
compared to Skriabin(PBUH) yes

[Anonymous No.17229880]

>>17229848
The violin annoys me because its clearly written as if for a piano. Other than that, its a pretty good effort by an amateur composer.

[Anonymous No.17229885]

>>17229855
Where’s your evidence that wagnerians hate Strauss?

[Anonymous No.17229889]

>>17229879
you're right

[Anonymous No.17229892]

>>17229885
you got me - 'twas merely b8
sue me

[Anonymous No.17229900]

>>17229080
Why do I feel like the majority of people who side with Nietzsche only like him because they feel resentment towards the people Nietzsche criticizes? Nietzscheans are always talking about people "seething" and being "slave moralists" while they themselves display equally weak attitudes.

>>17229529
Then all are weak and ill-constituted, only strong in their own eyes. And the science of such a race will only beget more rot, never the growth utopian lotus-eaters desire.

[Anonymous No.17229908]

>>17229900
It is the opposite. I diss them because niezsche-sensei dissed them. I dont care about wagner but i must defend my sensei

[Anonymous No.17229918]

>>17229606
>Franz Liszt 6'1
This man is such an alpha male, look at him. He looks like he's the main villain of a anime that everyone still sympathizes with.

[Anonymous No.17229919]

>>17229908
You orbit his sun because yours is weaker. Change that

[Anonymous No.17229920]

>>17229900
funnily enough, most Nietzscheans enjoy Wagner a lot, while Wagnerians absolutely despise Nietzsche in disregard of his influence & accomplishments while simultaneously not even daring to read him.
Why is that?

[Anonymous No.17229932]

>>17229920
>funnily enough, most Nietzscheans enjoy Wagner a lot
yeah sure rotfl

[Anonymous No.17229935]

>>17229918
long boi is long

[Anonymous No.17229954]

>>17229920
>he can't enjoy both
>all of group X absolutely despise Nietzsche because reason Y
I see you've taken lessons in generalizing without concrete evidence, much like the mustache man himself.

[Anonymous No.17229994]

>>17229918
He was the equivalent of a kpop idol in his days

[Anonymous No.17229998]

>>17229954
>all of group X
never said that
what i'm saying is that all Nietzscheans i met generally enjoyed music & none of them has a strong dislike for Wagner, it simply isn't their first choice - on the other hand a lot of Wagnerians straight out refuse to even read him, because they feel personally attacked in their often christian identity
that's a thing

[Anonymous No.17230027]

>>17229709
>An aesthetically sound mind should come to the conclusion that Nietzsche's books are better than Wagner's music is.
Teenage hands wrote this post:
https://youtu.be/r6OQCncAiC8

[Anonymous No.17230035]

>>17229711
>Liszt
Imagine having the gall to criticize Wagner for being embarrassingly populist while worshipping this guy.

[Anonymous No.17230039]

>>17230027
>nothing personal, kid..
https://youtu.be/wC_kuLSnuXk

[Anonymous No.17230046]

>>17230035
>enjoying his music means you LITERALLY WORSHIP HIM!!!111
ask me how i know that you're clinically retarded

[Anonymous No.17230052]

>>17229998
Ah, so an impression of yours. Why would they have a strong dislike of Wagner, when Nietzsche praised him earlier on, Hitler listened to him? There's still much to appreciate

>in their often Christian identity
Can you prove this? Why does a Nietzschean make everything about Christianity, as if a non-Christian cannot dislike Nietzsche (God forbid anyone do such a thing!). If you like Nietzsche, I'm not going to call you a "pagan" or "anti-Christian." How do you feign to know what they disliked about Nietzsche? How do you know that these "Nietzscheans" have even read Nietzsche, let alone the "Wagnerians" (whatever that means) who refuse to read him?

[Anonymous No.17230055]

>>17230046
>what is hyperbole
Nietzschetards...

[Anonymous No.17230064]

>>17230039
Bach is sublime but this has nothing to do with the quality of Nietzsche's work.

[Anonymous No.17230066]

>>17230046
Tell that to >>17229998, who believes there exists this class named "Wagnerians" (he likely means the motley people apologizing for Wagner against the excesses of Nietzscheans, who I can accurately call such because they center their personalities around this one man)

[Anonymous No.17230084]

>>17230052
>Can you prove this?
My Interactions with "Wagnerians"? No, i didn't record them just to post them on 4chins, gomen ne. Also i'm not making anything "about Christianity", i simply recall a lot of people who absolutely loved Wagner getting really angry as soon as i mentioned Nietzsche, immediately misquoting "God is dead" and accusing him of Nihilism, Atheism and whatnot.
Srom this i simply deduce that they feel personally attacked in their personal beliefs by his mere existence.
why so autistic?

[Anonymous No.17230089]

Nietzsche loved Wagner for his genius, and hated Wagner because of the way he used his genius to emotionally manipulate his audience. Why don't people understand this?

[Anonymous No.17230094]

>>17230064
but with his taste

[Anonymous No.17230103]

>>17230094
The post wasn't addressing Nietzsche's tastes but his work.

[Anonymous No.17230110]

>>17230066
literally same guy - made it up for simplicities sake, so that i don't have to write "people who like Wagner and advocate for him on the Internet" every time, doofus-kun

[Anonymous No.17230116]

>>17229919
Ich bin nietzsches grunzeschwein oink oink

[Anonymous No.17230117]

>all this autism

[Anonymous No.17230121]

>>17230116
basiert & schweingepillt

[Anonymous No.17230124]

>>17230084
>Why so autistic?
Why so quick to jump to conclusions and generalizations about people? It's like me saying "any time I post about Christianity, these atheist/pagan/Jews start criticizing me, likely because they're 'Nietzscheans'" Yes, it's true that they dislike his "nihilism" or supposed "atheism," but that doesn't make them Christians.

[Anonymous No.17230127]

>>17230103
nah, it was just an Ad Hominem

[Anonymous No.17230143]

>>17230110
But Wagner isn't a philosophy, I don't see why his apologists merit the title "Wagnerians" when they likely listen to other composers, as well. A Nietzschean, on the other hand, is an sensible title. Just clearing things up

[Anonymous No.17230149]

>>17230089
underrated

[Anonymous No.17230158]

>>17228745
He looks like a metalhead

[Anonymous No.17230167]

>>17230027
DER GNADE HEIL IST DEM BÜSSER BESCHIEDEN
ER GEHT EINST EIN IN DER SELIGEN FRIEDEN

[Anonymous No.17230176]

>>17230124
>quick
every single person i ever met irl or in the internet over the years who advocated for Wagner got emotional about the simple mention of Nietzsche & said something along the lines of "but Nietzsche was a Nihilist/Atheist" etc., which makes me suspect 2 things:
>a) they never actually read Nietzsche
>b) Wagner is somehow synonymous for them with Christianity
Why exactly do you think this would be a hastened assumption?
Why would i assume something else? What reason do i have to do so?

[Anonymous No.17230183]

What’s the consensus on translated opera, specifically those of Wagner? Is it based and useful or cringe/disrespectful?

[Anonymous No.17230187]

>>17230143
>"Wagnerians"
It's just one anon spamming him, never talking about what he wrote and slinging shit.

[Anonymous No.17230188]

>>17230167
have some ßßßßßßßß, but don't spend them all at once

[Anonymous No.17230204]

>>17230158
epic win

[Anonymous No.17230223]

>>17230187
Or, more likely, they have a peculiar definition of "nihilism" under which Nietzsche falls, or know of him only though the butchered presentations of his supporters on /lit/ and other forums of debate.

>Wagner is synonymous for them with Christianity
It's more likely that Nietzsche is synonymous for them with the hatred of Wagner, or certain ideas they themselves uphold (that need not be Christianity). I don't know- is Wagner some great Christian? If not, why would they view him as such?

Why would you assume anything else? Because all of your evidence is just an impression you've built up. "Every single person I ever met irl or on the internet who did X" might just as well be a fable, or a handful. Your lack of specificity only makes me surer that this is the case

[Anonymous No.17230227]

>>17230187
Wagneroo is just the epitome of that phenomena

[Anonymous No.17230232]

reminder that nietzsche never said that slave morality was a bad thing

[Anonymous No.17230257]

>>17230232
>bad thing
>good thing

[Anonymous No.17230267]

>>17230223
>is Wagner some great Christian?
Yes, and the "Wagnerians" make that often a very vocal point when asked about or teased with Nietzsche.
>just an impression
i'm not a post-modernist. the "impressions" i make are real, just as are instinct & intuition.
if you don't believe me, why don't you try the following:
>find someone who advocates for Wagner & preferably also against Nietzsche
>state "Nietzsche was right about Wagner"
>profit

>>17230232
it's all a matter of perspective
i, for my part, do not wish to be a slave

[Anonymous No.17230281]

>>17230089
He actually hated Wagner because Wagner's leaked correspondence with Nietzsche's doctor created a cloud of gossip around Nietzsche's sexuality.

[Anonymous No.17230287]

>>17230176
>b-but Nietzsche was a Nihilist/Atheist
sorry I just had to

[Anonymous No.17230295]

>>17230287
made me chuckle

[Anonymous No.17230301]

>>17230287
Is this the Wagnerian wojak?

[Anonymous No.17230311]

>>17230301
bingo

[Anonymous No.17230348]

>>17230311

[Anonymous No.17230372]

Wagner obviously won by living a successful life with thousands of admirers, whereas Niet died pathetically as an infantile, whiny bitch.

[Anonymous No.17230389]

>>17230372
This. Also Wagner remained a faithful Schopenhauerian to his death while Nietzsche pathetically turned his back to his educator.

[Anonymous No.17230406]

Actually Schopenhauer was the whiny little bitch

[Anonymous No.17230419]

>>17230406
Is that just your "perspective" anon? Are you going to justify it by writing a "poetic" rant?

[Anonymous No.17230434]

>>17230419
Schopenhauer was a Nihilist who couldn't cope with life. The fact that Nietzsche turned away from him is exactly what makes him worth reading.

[Anonymous No.17230492]

>>17230434
Nietzscheans cannot write aphoristic ad hominems as well as Nietzsche, so they just resort to making memetic ad hominems. Very well, go make some more memes while I keep on reading Goethe's Diwan with delight.
Wer nicht von dreitausend Jahren
Sich weiß Rechenschaft zu geben,
Bleib im Dunkeln unerfahren,
Mag von Tag zu Tage leben.

[Anonymous No.17230501]

>>17230492
>*moves goalpost*

[Anonymous No.17230513]

Nietzscheans even have the better Schopenhauer memes

[Anonymous No.17230529]

>>17230513
I'm sure Nietzsche would be proud of you for your Schopenhauer memes. Truly an step towards the Übermensch!

[Anonymous No.17230545]

>>17230529
I teach you the Übermeme
Wojak is something that shall be surpassed

[Anonymous No.17230550]

>>17228474
you're displaying the tell-tale signs of a pseud. Off yourself immediately. I fucking hate when pseud's try to talk /classical/

[Anonymous No.17230776]

bump for interest

[Anonymous No.17231586]

>>17229814
>you need to be a composer to talk about music
his stuff sounds like the compositions that make us do in uni on Professional Harmony (Romantic), it's really that level of exercise-y

[Anonymous No.17231704]

>>17229515
>Hitler was also more nietzschean than wagnerian
lmao
>& more nietzschean than Mussolini anyways
hahahahahaha

How can you be that historically illiterate ?

[Anonymous No.17231714]

>>17228953
based scriabinist

[Anonymous No.17231730]

>>17228953
holy.. BASED
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1VYX05DopGs

[Anonymous No.17231908]

>Nietzsche has great art at hand when it comes to using it as a foil, as a contrast, because in and of itself his relationship to the great composers was rather loose. Certainly he was musical, as they say. He even composed. But he made little use of the "Great Ones" of music for himself. In his garrulous manner he by no means left us in the dark about this. He speaks of Bach and Beethoven without any sympathy or understanding. For him, Beethoven is a representative of the 18th century, and the best thing about him is his ability to "find the notes of late bliss in faded love". (I wonder which works by Beethoven he might have had in mind with this strange definition.) No, Nietzsche certainly didn't care much about the organic and architectonic in music. What affected him about the music was the color, the perfume, the nuance, the sensuality, everything that was morbid, fleeting, seductive. Significantly, he once said that for Chopin he would "like to give all the rest of the music". Of course for that, which was unique about Chopin - the perfume - not what connected him to the other great musicians. As a musician, Nietzsche remained in his later days what he was from the start: "Wagnerian". How could he not? With regard to the basic attitude to an art - something that belongs entirely to the subconscious of our nature - one cannot change in the course of life despite all other developments.

>He is sensitive to the small values, but not to the large ones; for the nuance, but not for the full, whole vitality where he encounters it. This is not only the case in music. As the greatest German lyric poet, he does not consider Goethe, not Hölderlin, but - Heinrich Heine. He values Roman stylists and Roman poets far more than the Greeks. His concepts of fine arts are downright pitiful. That does not prevent him from trying again and again more than anyone else to define, to justify art. But it is precisely this justification that reveals the true character of his understanding of art. He says: "Art is intoxication, it has to be. Art can only be born from the exuberance, from the greatest excess of a person." The artist as "Dionysicist" - that is his experience. Exuberance, intoxication, perfume, Chopin as he understands it - all of this is the effect of art, not art itself.

>Wagner as he understood him - that was once art for him. When this column wavers, everything falls down. When Wagner begins to be questionable for him, so does the artist in general; yes, behind the fact "art" in general, the same Nietzsche is now beginning to put a question mark, after having oriented his life and thought to this very art. The dualism of his being, this thorn in his own flesh, shows itself in a terrible way. With that, however, his position against Wagner becomes obsolete in itself. Nietzsche, however much it may appear to be the opposite, is not a qualified witness to speak against Wagner.

t. Furtwängler

[Anonymous No.17233114]

>>17231704
>zero arguments

[Anonymous No.17233224]

>>17229060
Late stage Syphilis is no joke.

[Anonymous No.17233236]

>>17229606
The malnutrition was real.

[Anonymous No.17233635]

This thread has proved there are no intelligent Nietzscheans who dislike Wagner. And initially right up until WW2, their influence was inextricably connected.

Just look at D'Annunzio, who carried Wagner's coffin in Venice by the way, and his book Il fuoco.

[Anonymous No.17233652]

>>17233224
>syphilis
never proven

[Anonymous No.17233740]

>>17233635
>This thread has proved there are no intelligent people on this board
improved

[Anonymous No.17233744]

>>17229080
>of course the nihilist has no understanding of a kindred people, the likes of which Wagner was trying to revive from the Greeks
>implying Wagner isn't the single most divisive and seethe-causing modern cultural figure
>implying Nietzsche hasn't been entirely sublimated into and championed by the modern mind, as the masses frame it

[Anonymous No.17233756]

>>17233740
I can accept this.

[Anonymous No.17234527]

>>17233652
>NOOOO NIETZSCHE NEVER HAD GAY SEX (often) AS A YOUNG MAN AND CONTRACTED SYPHILIS IT DIDN'T HAPPEN NO STOP TALKING ABOUT IT

[Anonymous No.17234636]

>>17234527
I'm not a Nietzschean but he had severe headaches his entire life and was also very sickly in general as so many great intellects are, it's very unlikely that he had syphilis, and much more likely that he just had some defect or problem he was born with.

[Anonymous No.17235987]

bump

[Anonymous No.17236017]

>>17235987
The soulless, single bump.

[Anonymous No.17236072]

>>17236017
ja

[Anonymous No.17236893]

>>17233635
D'Annunzio was a coomer

[Anonymous No.17238408]

>>17231908
>This is not only the case in music. As the greatest German lyric poet, he does not consider Goethe, not Hölderlin, but - Heinrich Heine
>>17231908
>He values Roman stylists and Roman poets far more than the Greeks.
So Neech was some kind of proto-contrarian?

[Anonymous No.17239068]

>>17236893
You're a coomer.

[Anonymous No.17240052]

>>17228474
Common misconception amongst people who know nothing about Wagner. Go listen to Parsifal and try to repeat your drivel.