1. Tragedy, Pessimism, Nietzsche
Author(s): Joshua Foa Dienstag
Reviewed work(s):
Source: New Literary History, Vol. 35, No. 1, Rethinking Tragedy (Winter, 2004), pp. 83-101
Published by: The Johns Hopkins University Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20057822 .
Accessed: 23/09/2012 12:13
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
.
The Johns Hopkins University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
New Literary History.
http://www.jstor.org

2. Tragedy, Pessimism, Nietzsche
Joshua Foa Dienstag
All the tragedies which we can imagine return in
the end to the one and only tragedy: the passage
of time.
?Simone Weil
Who today would
the label of pessimist for themselves?
claim
We
employ the word
"pessimism" today largely to name an
unhealthy psychological disposition. Like a mysterious tropi
cal disease, pessimism is something we fear to catch without quite
knowing what its symptoms are. While tragedy and its history have been
the of intense academic for more than a
subject scrutiny century,
pessimism and its history have languished in obscurity. Indeed, it still
needs pointing out today that pessimism has a history, and a compli
cated one at that.
In fact, pessimism is a philosophy?a philosophy at the heart of the
debate, both aesthetic and political, about tragedy. Today, "pessimistic"
is also a that we are to attach to those views we find
predicate eager
objectionable. But when Friedrich Nietzsche reissued The Birth of Tragedy
in 1886, he added the subtitle Hellenism and Pessimism and emphasized,
in the new introduction, that what he still approved of in the book was
its examination of "the good severe will of the older Greeks to pessi
mism, to the Since that time, the link between
tragic myth."1 pessimism
and tragedy, the claim that tragedy is "the art form of pessimism" (BT
17), has been the object of a kind of sub-rosa debate in the scholarship
on
tragedy. It has often been equated (quite wrongly, I think) with the
idea that tragedy is distinctly and purely an ancient Greek form of
aesthetic activity. And this has been the dividing line between those who
have sought to impose strict boundaries on the genre of
tragedy and
those who have urged a more expansive view. The terms of this debate
have, in many ways, changed very little since George Steiner and
Raymond Williams set out opposing positions on these questions in the
early 1960s.
And yet much of this debate has taken place in ignorance of the
pessimistic tradition, or even of the distinctive way in which Nietzsche
New Literary History, 2004, 35: 83-101

3. 84 NEW LITERARY HISTORY
understood the he ascribed to the ancient Greeks. Pessi
"pessimism"
mism is not a Greek term, of course, and Nietzsche's use of it was an
anachronism. But while he did want, with this label, to indicate the
distinctiveness of tragic feeling, his intent was hardly to isolate it in the
fifth century BCE. Indeed, Nietzsche's ultimate term for his own (very
modern) philosophy is "Dionysian pessimism," where "Dionysus" indi
cates the ultimate author and actor of all tragedy (BT 73). It would be
well then
for scholars of tragedy to re-examine its relations with
pessimism, both to get at the roots of this debate as well as to get some
purchase on the question of tragedy's social and philosophical origins.
Much more is at stake than the proper meaning of terms. The
continuing political charge in questions of tragedy also finds its genesis
here. This is clear enough in Terry Eagleton's recent study of tragedy.
For the claim that tragedy issues from pessimism has been linked
(questionably, as we shall see) to the claim that the tragic is
perspective
no longer readily available to us. And this claim has also been linked
(again, questionably) to the idea that tragedy is a naturally elitist
perspective. Eagleton refers breezily to the "right-wing death-of-tragedy
thesis," as if the connection between and antidemocratic
pessimism
were so well-established as to no whatever.2
politics require explanation
Less blithely, Paul Gordon attempts to liberate a "rapturous" Nietzschean
on
perspective tragedy from its association with Steiner. It is striking
that, in so, he denies that Nietzsche's views in
doing specifically originate
Nietzsche's we are told, "is not at
pessimism; pessimism, really pessimism
all."3 The idea that and Gordon share, then, is a one: if
Eagleton simple
is it must lead nowhere, or else nowhere from
tragedy pessimistic, good
a
political perspective.
It is this presumption I want to challenge. While Nietzsche's pessi
mism not to our use of the term, I would
may correspond easily everyday
argue that it is our blindness about pessimism, combined with our
anxiety about it, that are the real stumbling blocks here. "The idea that
a is necessarily one of discouragement," Camus
pessimistic philosophy
once wrote, "is a idea, but one that needs too a refutation."4
puerile long
Taking up Camus's challenge will not only deepen our understanding of
tragedy but itwill also show that the political implications of pessimism
are not those often assumed. The fact that Camus, a
om-tragedy very
radical egalitarian, would defend pessimism, gives some indication of its
to unsettle, rather than confirm,
potential existing political arrange
ments. To
say that tragedy is pessimistic is not to say that it encourages
quietism or that it is antidemocratic. In the right hands, pessimism has
been?and can still be?an and even liberating ethic. This
energizing
needs to be taken into account, both in our estimation of tragedy itself,
and in our evaluation of Steiner's claims in The Death of Tragedy and the
reactions to them.
many

4. TRAGEDY, PESSIMISM, NIETZSCHE 85
I
While the word "pessimism" itself came into widespread use only in
the nineteenth it names a or set of
century, clearly persistent thought,
thoughts, that has recurred often in social and political theory, in
tandem with its opposite, at least since the Enlightenment. Leibniz first
used the term as a correlate to "maximum" (and as
"optimum," opposed
to "minimum"), in his Th?odic?e of 1710. French writers then began to
refer to his doctrine as one of The term crosses
optimisme. apparently
into English with the popularity of Voltaire's Candide ou VOptimisme of
1759. The first known printed appearance of "pessimism" in English
then follows a few decades later, although the context seems to indicate
that the term was in use.5 however, one
already Philosophically, might
date the emergence of pessimism to the appearance in 1750 of Rousseau's
Discourse On the Arts and Sciences, with its characterization of modern man
as a moral While Rousseau's ideas were seconded, in the
degenerate.
nineteenth in such works as Moral as well
early century, Leopardi's Essays
as in his poetry, pessimism achieved its brief period of genuine popular
ity through the work of Schopenhauer, whose Parerga and Paralipomena
went through many editions after its initial publication in 1851. Thereaf
ter, pessimism, while never a dominant school in was a well
philosophy,
recognized position for at least several generations.6 And this work was
part of the context that made possible the literature (for example,
Dostoyevsky, Ibsen, Strindberg) which we now readily refer to as
pessimistic. What the pessimists share, as I have argued elsewhere, is a
view of human existence as time-bound and, hence,
fundamentally
to the vicissitudes of time, in any features.7
subject lacking permanent
is most famous for this view: "Time and that
Schopenhauer perhaps
perishability of all things existing in time that time itself brings about....
Time is that by virtue of which everything becomes nothingness in our
hands and loses all real value."8
Nietzsche's relationship to the pessimists who preceded him was
one of uniform celebration. He called Rousseau a "moral
hardly
tarantula" and although initially inspired by Schopenhauer's philoso
phy, he eventually dissociated himself from its systematic conclusions
a respect for its critical was also
(while retaining spirit). Nietzsche
unkind toward the pessimists popular in the Germany of his day,
especially Eduard von Hartmann, the prominent Berlin philosopher;
Nietzsche called him "completely abysmal."9 Nietzsche believed that the
pessimism of both Hartmann and Schopenhauer led directly to nihil
ism. Indeed, the very popularity of this form of pessimism in the late
nineteenth was one of the factors that convinced Nietzsche that
century
nihilism would soon enjoy a temporary dominance of European society.

5. 86 NEW LITERARY HISTORY
then, Nietzsche does not mean either of two
By "pessimism," things
with which we might be tempted to identify it?it indicates neither a
depressive personality nor the of Arthur
philosophy Schopenhauer.
Indeed, in the same introduction where Nietzsche insists on the
pessimistic origin of tragedy, he goes to great pains to differentiate the
view he has in mind from that of Schopenhauer, which was at the height
of its popularity in Germany when Nietzsche wrote. His own "strange
and new valuations," the introduction claims, "were at odds
basically
with ...
Schopenhauer's spirit and taste!" (BT24). Intermixed with his
however, is an account of another kind of Nietzsche
critique, pessimism.
viewed it as "that that is . . . the to to
courageous pessimism way 'myself,'
task."10 he his alternative the name
my Ultimately, gave "Dionysian
pessimism."11
II
Thetask that The Birth of Tragedy set itself was to explain not only the
appearance of Greek tragedy, but also its decline in Greek society after
Euripides. As is well known, Nietzsche hypothesizes that Socrates'
introduction (and Plato's furtherance) of a rationalistic philosophy
destroyed the preexisting cultural grounds for Greek tragedy (BT Slfi.).
But what exactly did Socrates destroy, and how was this possible? Why, in
any case, should a philosopher have had the power to affect the theater?
The answer lies in the that Nietzsche associates with the
pessimism pre
Socratic philosophers and his belief that their ideas reflected the
original character of early Greek culture. "Tragedy," as he put it in a note
from this "is the outlet of
period, mystic-pessimistic knowledge."12
Pessimism was the philosophical basis for the plays of Aeschylus and
Sophocles. This was the wisdom that the pre-Socratics possessed and that
later generations first denied and then forgot. Socrates is the agent of
this change because his philosophy is essentially optimistic (BT 91ff.) .13
Nietzsche did not think of optimism and pessimism as two equal, if
opposite, ways of looking at the world, as we might today; rather
... is older and more than
"pessimism original optimism" (KGW
4.1.208). Pessimism is the domain of the Ionian philosophers who
Socrates and whose we in
preceded teachings possess only fragments.
Instead of trying to construct a systematic, ordering as
philosophy,
Socrates and Plato were to do, the the chaotic and
pre-Socratics grasped
disordered nature of the world and only attempted to cope with it,
insofar as that was possible: "Pessimism is the consequence of knowledge
of the absolute illogic of the world-order" (KGW3.3.74).

6. TRAGEDY, PESSIMISM, NIETZSCHE 87
In other notes from this period, Nietzsche first attributes to Democritus
the doctrine that "the world [is] without moral and aesthetic meaning"
and calls this idea "the pessimism of accidents" (KGW 3.4.151). In
Philosophy in the Tragic Age of the Greeks (written at about the same time as
The Birth but published only posthumously), he likens Anaximander to
Schopenhauer and calls him "the first philosophical author of the
ancients." He on to describe Anaximander as a "true and
goes pessimist"
quotes his only extant fragment to justify the label: "Where the source of
is, to that must also to
things place they pass away, according necessity,
for they must pay penance and be judged for their injustices, in
accordance with the ordinance of Time."14
In other words, the as Nietzsche them,
pre-Socratics, interpreted
grasped the animating principle of pessimism: that time is an unshakable
burden for human beings because it leads to the ultimate destruction of
all things?and that this fate belies any principle of order that may, on
the surface, to the course of events. Of course, whether
appear guide
any of the pre-Socratics would have put things this way is debatable
(although Heraclitus, in particular, is certainly often understood in this
fashion). What is important here is that Nietzsche understood them to
be doing so, that he understood the root of pessimism to be, as he later
wrote, "time-sickness [Zeit-Krankheit" (KGW7.2.51). The epigraph from
Weil captures the thought exactly: it is the destructive power of time that
stands behind any particular cause of
suffering in the world.
Nietzsche considered tragic theater to be an outgrowth of this view of
the universe as in flux, in the of
something constantly constantly process
becoming and, thus, in the process of The ravages
constantly destroying.
of time could not be cured or compensated for through tragedy, only
understood: ... is in its essence Existence is in
"Tragedy pessimistic.
itself something very terrible, man something very foolish" (KGW
3.2.38). Nietzsche rejects the conclusion, popular since Aristotle, that
tragedy offers some kind of purification of the emotions generated by
the terrible truths of the human condition.15 He also rejects the idea that
contain some sort of moral lesson meant to instruct us in
tragedies
ethical behavior. Instead, he argues, tragedy simply serves to lay bare for
us the horrible situation of human existence that the
pre-Socratic
philosophers describe, a situation from which our minds would other
wise flee: "The hero of tragedy does not prove himself ... in a
struggle
against fate, just as little does he suffer what he deserves. Rather, blind
and with covered head, he falls to his ruin: and his desolate but noble
burden with which he remains standing in the presence of this well
known world of terrors presses itself like a thorn in our soul" (KGW
3.2.38). The tragic outlook is thus generated from a base of pessimistic
It recommends no cure for the of existence, a
knowledge. pains only
public recognition of their depth and power.

7. 88 NEW LITERARY HISTORY
From the beginning, too, this view is associated with
the Dionysian,
"the mother of the mysteries,
tragedy, pessimism" (KGW 3.3.309). The
Athenian public theatrical festivals were known as the
Dionysia, and
Nietzsche goes so far as to claim the existence of a tradition "that Greek
tragedy in its earliest form had for its sole theme the sufferings of
Dionysus" (BT73).16 In Nietzsche's account, Dionysus suffers the proto
typical agonies of existence inflicted by time. He is severed from the
eternal flux and individuated, then torn to pieces and reunited with the
whole: "This view of things already provides us with all the elements of a
profound and pessimistic view of the world, together with the mystery
doctrine of tragedy: the fundamental knowledge of the oneness of every
the conception as the
thing existent, of individuaci?n primal cause of
evil, and of art as the joyous hope that the spell of individuation may be
broken in augury of a restored oneness" (BT 10).
Dionysian suffering is essentially human suffering. In tragedy, this is
indicated by a connection between the various elements involved in the
public performance of the drama. The tragic hero, to Nietzsche, simply
personifies the "Dionysian state" of the chorus as a whole (BT73). The
chorus is likewise "the mirror-image in which the Dionysian man
contemplates himself and also "a vision of the Dionysian mass of
(BT63). Thus, actor, chorus, and are all connected in
spectators" public
tragedy through their Dionysian character (PT165). Each is a fragment
torn from the whole. Nietzsche is here but also reconstitut
critiquing,
ing, the traditional philological stance that the chorus represents the
Greek public itself. Although he sharply attacks the original proponents
of this view, he, in fact, proposes not to reject it but to modify it. He will
the connection of citizens and chorus on the condition that
accept only
the Greek public is understood as a unique a
phenomenon, "Dionysian
throng," that is, as a public already infected with the pessimistic wisdom
of the
pre-Socratics.17
Nietzsche's conception is, then, just the opposite of the elitism it is
often associated with. Tragic knowledge is not something to which only
a few have access. Instead, the theater can function, on
privileged tragic
his account, only when the ethos
of pessimism is shared throughout the
demos. When Nietzsche rails against the "democratization" of taste in
post-Socratic Athens, he does not mean the larger population has a
natural distaste for tragedy; his complaint is only that the lower classes
are to Socrates' to their
particularly susceptible optimism. Appealing
suffering, it has the effect of stoking their resentments against the rich.
(If people were naturally optimistic, Socrates' role would be unimpor
tant. If anything is "natural," it is pessimism, though Nietzsche, who
eschews such terms, will only speak of it as "older and more original.")
So, he writes, in a lecture on has contained
Sophocles, "Tragedy always

8. TRAGEDY, PESSIMISM, NIETZSCHE 89
a pure democratic character, as it springs from the people" (KGW
2.3.17).18
Against this account of pessimism and tragedy as a kind of Dionysian
wisdom, Nietzsche the new Socratic whose
counterposes philosophy,
characteristic feature now
appears to be
its optimism.19 Even while
its ignorance, Socratic inquiry rejects the pessimistic idea
proclaiming
that inquiry, like every human activity, is ultimately doomed: "For who
could mistake the optimistic element in the nature of dialectic, which
celebrates a with conclusion . . . the element
triumph every optimistic
which, having
once penetrated tragedy must gradually overgrow its
regions and impel it necessarily to self-destruction" (BT 91).
Dionysian
Socrates does not promise eternal happiness, but he does affirm both
that virtue results in happiness and that virtue can be taught?thus
happiness theoretically is within the grasp of all.20 He denies that there
is anything ultimately mysterious about life or inevitable about suffering:
contrast with this practical pessimism, Socrates is the prototype of
"By
the theoretical optimist who, with his faith that the nature of things can
be fathomed, ascribes to knowledge and insight the power of a panacea"
(BT 97).
Notwithstanding Socrates' fate at the hands of his fellow citizens,
Nietzsche has no doubt that this approach, developed by Plato, was
ultimately victorious in its struggle with tragedy: "Optimistic dialectic
drives music out of tragedy with the scourge of its syllogisms" (BT92).
Just as the pessimism of an older generation of Greeks explains the
origin of tragedy, so the Socratic turn in Greek philosophy explains its
demise. When the population adopted the optimistic perspective, the
cultural context for tragedy evaporated (PT 161). From Nietzsche's
viewpoint, this was anything but a theoretical advance. Greek pessimism
had a fundamental honesty that Socratic-Platonic philosophy lacks. This
in particular, he reemphasized in the 1886 introduction to The
point,
Birth of Tragedy. While pessimism today, as it was in Nietzsche's time, is
commonly associated with ideas of cultural decay, he takes the Greek
experience to indicate precisely the opposite: "Is pessimism necessarily a
of decline ... as it once was in India and now is, to all
sign appearances,
us, 'modern' men and Is there a of
among Europeans? pessimism
. . .And of
strength? again: that of which tragedy died, the Socratism
morality, the dialectics, frugality, and cheerfulness of the theoretical
man?how now? Might not this very Socratism be a sign of decline ... Is
the resolve to be so scientific about everything perhaps a kind of fear of,
an escape from, pessimism? A subde last resort against?truth?" (BT 17-18).
The Greeks of Socrates' generation could no longer bear to live with
the brutal truths of the human condition and sought refuge in an
optimistic philosophy. To Nietzsche this was "morally speaking, a sort of

9. 90 NEW LITERARY HISTORY
cowardice . . . a ruse" Either it was an
amorally speaking, (BT 18). way,
active self-deception that made life more tolerable but less genuine. It
was a retreat from a real look at time-bound existence to a
pleasing
fantasy of progress and happiness. Thus, Nietzsche concludes, it is the
optimists who are the true harbingers of cultural decline. What else can
we call their weakening of resolve in comparison with the stance of the
earlier Greeks? Nietzsche's attack on Socrates and Plato is often taken to
be a defense of irrationalism, but from his perspective it is they who have
retreated from an honest assessment of the world. The vision
pessimistic
of the world as disordered, untamable, unfair, and
fundamentally
destructive is the "truth" against which they close their eyes and
withdraw to a cave.21
Ill
Tragic art
is the organization of a small portion of an otherwise
meaningless world
that gives purpose to an individual existence (WP
585). It is the attempt to impose a temporary form on the inevitable
transformation of the world. Since the world must some
acquire particu
lar forms in its art is in miniature, as it were,
metamorphoses, "repeating
the tendency of the whole" (
WP6l7)-only now by an effort of will. Thus,
art is not an to the of existence, but rather to
really attempt fight pattern
shape that pattern into something recognizable, "to realize in oneself the
eternal joy of becoming-that joy which also encompasses joy in destruc
tion' (77110).
When art assumes this it becomes "the seduction to life,
shape, great
the great stimulant to life" (WP 853). This is not to say, however, that
such art must be "uplifting" in the conventional sense. Since joy in
destruction may be a stimulant to life, even depictions of the most
miserable things may be included: "The things they display are ugly: but
that they display them comes from their pleasure in the ugly . . .How
liberating is Dostoevsky!" (WP 821). If we can understand why an artist
like Dostoyevsky, who knows that art is devoid of metaphysical value,
would still want to write, then we can understand why Nietzsche thinks
pessimism can result in a creative pathos. Similarly, if we can see how
tragedy, the "repetition in miniature" of worldly chaos, can represent
the liberating 'joy of becoming," then we can get a sense for the political
productivity of a pessimistic ethic.
The normal situation of an architect, I think, helps us to get some
purchase on this: any sane architect must know that no building lasts
forever. Built in opposition to nature but using the unstable materials of
nature (as, to some extent, human structure must be),
every every

10. TRAGEDY, PESSIMISM, NIETZSCHE 91
edifice will be attacked by nature so
(by wind, by water, by gravity, and
forth) the moment it is completed. Whatever the purpose for which it is
initially designed, that purpose will someday be superseded. However
beautiful it may seem when erected, it will to another set of
someday,
Yet, all this, architects pursue their craft.
eyes, appear ugly. knowing
Knowing that the universe will ultimately not tolerate their work, they
continue to a small of that same universe for local
organize portion
purposes. The lack of an objective or metaphysical meaning for the work
is no obstacle; indeed, architects often think of the generation of locally
environments out of natural waste to be a a
meaningful particular goal,
to
spur activity.
then, is an ethos of a similar kind, an art of
Dionysian pessimism,
In it as a Nietzsche is, in some
living.22 recommending life-practice,
sense, the of life. But since, as he was
thereby recommending practice
fond of pointing out, there is really no perspective from which to view
life as a whole (whether to deny or affirm it), such an assent can only be
a kind of gamble or risk-taking. It is an affirmation in the dark, an
approval given in ignorance. Above all, in keeping with the emphasis on
the centrality of temporal experience, it is a decision to welcome the
unknown future and the unseen rather than to a
accept past, clinging
familiar present.23 While other pessimisms (such as Schopenhauer's)
also conclude that the universe has no order and human no
history
progress, Dionysian pessimism is the one that can find something to like
about this situation: new to new version of
"My way 'yes-' My pessimism
as a for fearful and of beings. ... A
voluntary quest questionable aspects
pessimist such as that could in that way lead to a Dionysian yes-saying to
the world as it is: as a wish for its absolute return and eternity: with which
a new ideal of philosophy and sensibility would be given" (KGW
8.2.121).
The phrase "fearful and questionable," which recurs frequently in
Nietzsche's texts, is chosen to indicate what is at issue here.24
carefully
The aspects of existence that we will have the greatest difficulty grasping
and affirming are not the cruel and disgusting; rather, they are those so
threatening to our sense of order that we have heretofore denied their
very being, so that initially we find them "questionable" or "dubious."
Which are these? In Twilight of the Idols, Nietzsche ridicules "the almost
laughable poverty of instinct displayed by German philologists whenever
they approach the Dionysian" (77108). Why laughable? Because these
cannot the "instinct," so to under
philologists recognize speak, right
their noses. The are "the of
"Dionysian mysteries" simply mysteries
. . . the sexual as
sexuality symbol was to the Greeks the symbol venerable
such, the intrinsic profound meaning of all antique piety" (77109). The
absurdity of post-Socratic philosophy is ultimately demonstrated in its

11. 92 NEW LITERARY HISTORY
attitudes toward sex and the body. What ought to be the most obvious
and immediate source of knowledge and pleasure is not merely ob
scured but almost entirely obliterated. Cruelty may be condemned by
morality but at least it is acknowledged; sexuality is eliminated from view
through a process of "moral castrationism" WP204,
( 383). Pessimism, by
contrast, puts the terrible power of sexuality at the center of tragic
drama.
Sexuality, not cruelty or violence, represents that part of life with
which it is most difficult to come to terms. It is the most difficult not
because it is inherently shameful ("It was only Christianity . . .which
made of sexuality something impure" [77 109]). The difficulty lies in
affirming the necessity for pain and suffering that accompanies any
growth. That is, it involves admitting that we ourselves (and not just the
world) are essentially flux and change, as our sexual
experiences
demonstrate. With its constant dissolution of ego-boundaries, sexuality
is more threatening to the optimist than is the human tendency to
cruelty. This violation of self?simultaneously painful and pleasurable?
is the and best evidence that our own nature is as unstable and
simplest
tumultuous as that of the rest of the universe and that, therefore, no
calculation of our best interest can ever be permanent. It is this situation
that tragedy makes visible.
The Dionysian is "the triumphant Yes to life beyond death and
true life as collective continuation of life
change; through procreation"
(7/109). But this can come only at the cost of suffering, as the price to
be paid for continuous rebirth: "In the teaching of the mysteries, pain is
sanctified: the 'pains of childbirth' sanctify pain in general?all becom
and all that the . . .All
ing growing, guarantees future, postulates pain.
this is contained in the word Dionysus" (7/ 109). The Dionysian is not
simply sexuality (Nietzsche is not Freud); rather, the repression of
sexuality represents the repression of the "fearful and questionable" as
such. (Likewise, Greek tragedies are not
simply sexual conflicts, though
such conflicts are often at the core of them.) Accepting the necessity of
pain in a life of growth and change, setting aside the goal of happiness as the
ultimate aim of a human life, iswhat the Dionysian "yes" requires. To truly
embrace becoming at the expense of being means to take pleasure in the
suffering that accompanies the demise of whatever is. "The joy of Being is only
possible as the joy of appearance [.] The joy of becoming is only possible
in the destruction of the actuality of 'Beings,' the beautiful visions, in the
pessimistic annihilation of illusions. [I]n the destruction also of beauti
ful illusions, Dionysian as its climax" (i?GW8.1.114).
joy appears
The Dionysian "yes" is not a matter of taking a sadistic pleasure in the
suffering of others. Rather, it is a decision to value the future over the
present. To be glad that ours is a world of becoming, rather than being,

12. TRAGEDY, PESSIMISM, NIETZSCHE 93
means to be glad that things are always changing, that the future is
and the away. It means detach
always coming present always passing
ment from whatever exists at present?something that will inevitably
as callousness towards others: wisdom. in the
appear "Dionysian Joy
destruction of the most noble and at the sight of its progressive ruin: in
reality joy in what is coming and lies in the future, which triumphs over
existing things, however good" (WP417). This iswhat Nietzsche had in
mind such as or eternal recurrence. Not the idea
by phrases "amorfati"
that we must relive the past again and again, but rather that this pattern
of destruction and creation is unalterable and must be borne. And it
cannot be withstood by means of faith in progress. We must learn to
hope in the absence of an expectation of progress. If this sounds almost
nonsensical to the modern ear, perhaps it is because we have been told
for so long that progress is the rational thing to hope for.
While no element of our life is unalterable, suffering is the unalter
able price to be paid for changing it. It is this condition that we have no
choice but to accept as a whole or to reject through the hypocrisy of
In a famous note, Nietzsche embodies the two choices as
optimism.25
"Dionysus and the Crucified": "The problem is that of the meaning of
whether a Christian or a We can
suffering: meaning tragic meaning."
surely struggle to alter those elements of life within our purview, but we
will still be faced with the larger question where we cannot pick and
choose. One alternative is to life, and its afflictions, as a whole:
reject
"The god on the cross is a curse on life, a signpost to seek redemption
from life." The other is to embrace life, with all the suffering entailed,
both for ourselves and for others: cut to is a of
"Dionysus pieces promise
life: it will be eternally reborn and return again from destruction" WP
(
1052). If one the assessment of the world as a of
accepts pessimistic place
chaos and dissonance, one faces the choice of from it
retreating
wholesale or embracing it and trying to "let a harmony sound forth from
every conflict" WP 852).
(
IV
George Steiner, as far as I can tell, did not use the term "pessimism,"
or its cognates, in The Death of Tragedy; but his interpretation has been
characterized as pessimistic and, it must be said, with considerable
as we use Nietzsche's of this term, rather
justice?so long understanding
than the conventional one. For Steiner's interpretation of tragedy
repeats elements of Nietzsche's view. First, there is the natural
important
condition of disorder and flux in the world, which is expressed in
tragedy: "Tragedy," Steiner writes, "would have us know that there is in

13. 94 NEW LITERARY HISTORY
the fact of human existence a or a it tells us
very provocation paradox;
that the purposes of men sometimes run the grain of
against inexpli
cable and destructive forces."26 It teaches us "of the bias
unfaltering
toward inhumanity and destruction in the drift of the world" (7)7291).
As in Nietzsche, offers no for this?"the wounds
tragedy compensation
are not healed the broken spirit is not mended"
and (DT 129)?only a
controlled repetition of it. Then, there is the historical attack on this
by the forces of optimism and rationality, which occurs
pessimism
outside the theater itself. While Steiner transposes the cultural shift that
Nietzsche describes from the fifth century BCE to the seventeenth
century CE, the transformation described is the same: "When the new
world picture of reason usurped the place of the old tradition ... the
English theatre entered its long decline" (DT 23). The culprit is not
Socrates, but a Socratic Rousseau, or, rather, "The Rousseauist belief in
the perfectibility "such a view of the human condition
of man," since is
radically optimistic" (7)7127-8). More broadly, of course, Steiner claims
that it is the rise of the bourgeoisie, the commodification of everyday
life, and the final victory of Christian metaphysics that diverted the West
from the theater to the novel and from tragedy to melodrama. But it is
the optimism that is the common root of such seemingly contrary forces
as the Enlightenment, the Church, the market, and even Marxism, that
us of the proper context for tragedy.
deprives
Like Nietzsche, then, Steiner derives from and
tragedy pessimism
accounts for the decline of tragedy by reference to the triumph of
But what follows from this account, it should now be clear,
optimism.
need not be a aesthetics or Whatever Steiner's
reactionary politics.
intent (which I do not pursue here, though I think it has often been
oversimplified), Nietzsche's "Dionysian pessimism" is the source of his
most radical claims, claims that have, most to a series
recently, appealed
of radically democratic political theorists. Tracy Strong describes
Nietzsche's as a "politics of transfiguration," and it is this theme
politics
of self-shaping and self-transformation against a tragic background
which is the key link between Nietzsche and such figures as Camus,
Arendt, Foucault, and William Connolly. Each of these writers has found
in Nietzsche a portrait of energetic individuality that can be supportive
of democracy while remaining distinct from the liberal assumptions that
are often assumed to be a to democratic
necessary complement theory.
Nietzsche's does not elitism, and it does not recom
pessimism require
mend Instead, as these twentieth-century inheritors of Nietzsche
passivity.
have seen, it sanctions a of based not on an
process identity-renovation
on an
assumption of the selfs natural integrity but, to the contrary,
acknowledgment of its fundamental instability and perishability. While
acknowledging limits to the human condition, this is a politics of

14. TRAGEDY, PESSIMISM, NIETZSCHE 95
more radical than most. It makes little sense, therefore, to
possibility
link pessimism (or pessimism-cwm-tragedy) with conservative politics.
The pessimistic spirit is a restless one, unlikely to be enamored of the
status quo.
Relatedly, while the derivation of tragedy from pessimism does, as
Steiner argued, require marking off a boundary of genre between
tragedy and cathartic, but ultimately hopeful, optimistic art forms, such
as melodrama, this account should not be taken to limit to a
tragedy
particular time, place, or (least of all) class of people. To say that not all
suffering is tragedy is very different from saying that tragic suffering is
rare or to cultures. Indeed, there are several reasons
specific particular
for thinking that the pessimistic account of tragedy, though not as
limitless in its definition of the genre as others, is still an expansive one.
In the first place, the insistence on the overpowering force of temporal
flux means that there are no cultural conditions to
permanent oppose
(or foster) tragedy. Rather, it is the lack of such permanence that fosters
tragedy. From this perspective, Raymond Williams is right to insist
(contra Steiner) that tragedy emerges not from static belief but from
"the real tension between old and new," that occurs in a
something
was no less negative
variety of contexts.27 Though Nietzsche than Steiner
on the baleful condition of modernity, he wrote The Birth at least in part
because he thought the production of a new kind of musical tragedy was
possible.28 And even after he lost his faith inWagner's abilities in this
regard, Nietzsche continued to insist on the openness of the future and
the potential for both new pessimistic art forms and new forms of life to
go with them.29 When he came to classify Wagner's work as a kind of
romanticism and, hence, he turned to other modern
pseudo-tragic,
works, such as the of and Bizet's Carmen. In the
writings Dostoyevsky
latter in particular, he found the "tragic joke" of our existence so well
that he returned to see the his own account, no less
expressed opera, by
than twenty times (CW157-9).
So, while the pessimistic conception of tragedy may remain hostile to
works of easy there is no barrier to in
redemption, tragedy's appearing
our time or outside of the theater. Indeed, a pessimist must insist on the
universal availability of tragic themes, if not on their perennial appear
ance.30 Not only did Nietzsche believe his own philosophy was one such
manifestation, but he also found writing like Dostoyevsky's to reflect, not
nihilism, but precisely a pessimistic ethic. Nor should Nietzsche's
labeling of Dostoyevsky (and himself) as "liberating" surprise us. Pessi
mism is as much an ethic of radical possibility as it is of radical insecurity;
indeed, the former is grounded in the latter. It is the lack of any natural
boundaries to human character that our
permits, simultaneously, capac
ity for novelty and distinctiveness as well as our capacity for enormous

15. 96 NEW LITERARY HISTORY
we cannot have one without the other. characters
cruelty; Dostoyevsky's
sometimes react to this lack of boundaries with actions that are hideous,
but this is due to a lack of imagination that does not, on Nietzsche's
account, afflict Dostoyevsky himself. Raskolnikov does not define the
condition; rather, he is its worst consequence. But
pessimistic possible
the effect of the book is still liberating, because, like tragedy, it alerts us
to, even as it warns us about, the freedom that is our lot.
double-edged
Or, perhaps, instead of speaking of freedom as double-edged, we
should refer to as the universal, simulta
pessimistic tragedy teaching
neous presence of freedom lives. To political and
theorists terror in our
such as Hannah Arendt, the tread the political arena idea that we
"without a banister" announces both the danger of totalitarianism and
the condition of possibility for true individuality. Modern fascism had
demonstrated that there are no innate limits to human but our
cruelty,
of that fact could, allow us to reach the
acknowledgement curiously,
true conclusion that "with each birth something uniquely new
equally
comes into the world" from which "the can be
unexpected expected."31
Steiner argued that Greek drama demonstrated the capricious cruelty of
the world, as well as revealing the independence and humanity of those
who are the victims of it. But even a social drama as and
microscopic
modern (and bourgeois) as Edith Wharton's The House ofMirth (or, I
think, the recent film Amores Perros) has the requisite dual sense of
freedom and terror. In both of these, the of individuals is most
shape
revealed as the social structures that them
vividly support collapse?
or Ajax}2
precisely as in Antigone
This is not the idea that we see the "true" individual in a time of
adversity. Rather, it is the view that the sources of individuality and of
that which destroys individuality are the same. From this perspective, it
makes no sense to ask whether the is one who
tragic personage willfully
themselves from their or whether are out
separates society they pushed
or circumstance (neither for Antigone nor for Lily Bart is
by malice
there a good answer to this question). To a pessimist, all of these
situations arise equally from the fundamental instability of human
beings and human institutions, anchorless in time. We are all equally
subject to the freedom and terror of the tragic situation. And if some
stories are "more
tragic" than others, this is due merely to (a) the
circumstance that some situations exemplify a fundamental condition
better than others, and (b) our limited, but real enough, capacity to
insulate ourselves from this circumstance ourselves in a life of
by burying
conformity. It is one of the special marks of tragedy, I think, that it often
causes us to the of a safe and life, even as it
question pursuit painless
promises us that in abandoning this pursuit we will come to a bad end. In

16. TRAGEDY, PESSIMISM, NIETZSCHE 97
the of human we will necessar
enlarging envelope possible experience,
ily mark a unique
out path of suffering. Perhaps, instead of "sweet
violence," should speak of a terror that liberates.
we
Among political theorists, I think it is Arendt, particularly in The
Human Condition, who gives us the best image of a stance that is
and democratic. It has
simultaneously pessimistic, tragic, energetic,
often seemed
difficult to reconcile Arendt's praise for the fiercely
agonistic and individualistic spirit of Athenian democracy (which, to a
certain, limited degree, she saw reflected in American politics) with her
critique of modern liberal institutions, as well as with her long-term
historical dread of the rise of technology and the market. But putting
these views in a context make sense of them. Modern
pessimistic helps
democracy is, to her, too often optimistic, in the sense that it values the
contributions of individuals only insofar as they to contribute to a larger
of historical Athenian on the other hand,
process progress. democracy,
lacking a sense of progress, indeed, possessed of the pessimistic belief in
the absence of historical was better able to value
long-term patterns,
individual actions for their own sake. To her, then, it is no coincidence
that Athens, the democratic city, is also the city of tragedy. For Athenian
treasures, as Athenian does, the memory of vital
democracy just tragedy
individuals?even when their efforts came to And Athenian
nothing.
democracy encourages individuals not with promises of progress, but
only of remembrance. Similarly, in Camus's Myth of Sisyphus we see the
to translate a into an active, democratic
attempt "tragic myth" political
idiom. The futility of Sisyphus's task, we are told, is no obstacle to his
embracing it, so long
as we understand that
futility is the
ordinary order
of things.33 Indeed, for Camus, the universality of futility is the basis for
a kind of pessimistic equality of citizenship.
Pessimism thus liberates us from a dull submission to a historical
meta-narrative that we did not author. It insists that, for better and
worse, our lives are not historical or social ties,
pre-scripted by processes
even as it insists that we act in a context that we cannot control and that
therefore we act, in all likelihood, tragically. And yet, as "author," each of
us is, like the world that we face, an with no
ever-changing multiplicity
or desire that is not to revision, loss, and renewal?most
purpose open
often, but not exclusively, through the medium of eros, which attaches
us to others by the boundaries of each. Arendt is perhaps more
violating
true to this insight than Camus is, in insisting that every
political action,
no matter how individual in
origin, is always an interaction with others.
Tragic drama, it is said, truly began to differentiate itself from religious
ritual with the introduction of the second actor onto the stage. Likewise,
Arendt insists on the condition of human plurality as the starting point
for all political reasoning.

17. 98 NEW LITERARY HISTORY
The of and then, even on an account that
politics pessimism tragedy,
insists on some traditional boundaries of are not at all those of
genre,
reaction or elitism. Indeed, democratic the tragic
politics require
viewpoint if they are to liberate themselves from the dubious optimistic
meta-narratives of It is this element of Nietzsche's outlook, I
modernity.
would argue, that has so appealed to the contemporary democratic
theorists whose work I have hastily described. Pessimism insists on an
on the of flux and eros that
equality of (tragic) condition; ubiquity
frame this condition; on the and dangers that follow from
possibilities
this; and on the uniqueness of every individual. It does chasten politics in
that it discourages utopianism; it discounts the belief either in the
perfectibility of the species or of our political conditions. But to claim
that it deflates our political energies in general is to mistake utopianism
for the whole of politics. I have argued, on the contrary, that tragic
pessimism liberates us by replacing the pseudo-natural boundaries of
self and history with the terrifying limitless horizon of time-bound
existence.
V
Schopenhauer wrote: "The life of every individual, viewed as a whole
... is
and in general really a tragedy; but gone through in detail it has the
character of a While I have taken some time here to defend
comedy."34
the association of and of
pessimism tragedy against misinterpretations
its meaning, I nonetheless do not want to be understood as
simply
identifying the two. Tragedy may issue from pessimism, but it is not the
that can do so. Even before Socrates, there was a Greek comic
only thing
theater, which, if my is to make sense, must also, in some
argument any
sense, have been in I would argue, furthermore,
grounded pessimism.
that we can easily find modern examples of pessimistic comedy; the first
in prominence might be Don Quixote. But that argument must be the
to recall the
subject for another paper. Failing this, I think itworthwhile
very fine line between tragedy and comedy that Schopenhauer de
scribes. To him, the two genres depict the same human condition, only,
we at
might say, varying speeds.
and then, are not one and the same. But there is
Tragedy pessimism,
a strong link between them that has, I have argued, been misunder
stood. Pessimism is neither to ancient Greek theater nor to
equivalent
aristocratic It does, however, claim to describe the funda
resignation.
mental ontology of the human condition?one of radical insecurity and
radical possibility, freedom and terror?that is the potential ground of
While teaching us the limitations of time-bound life, pessimistic
tragedy.