دانلود کتاب Left-Wing Nietzscheans: The Politics of German Expressionism. 1910-1920

Nietzsche the elitist individualist, or Nietzsche the social critic? Nietzsche the universal existentialist, or Nietzsche the militant nationalist? "Become what you are," or "the will to power"? These are some of the questions relating to the influence of the "un-timely" German thinker and poet upon the various ideological movements of the twentieth century, ranging from fascism on the right to anarchist socialism on the left. While on the political sides (both right and left) the claims and disclaims to Nietzsche have often resulted from distorted editions and quotations taken out of the context of his works, the intellectual followers of Nietzsche often saw it necessary to abandon their "teacher" in the face of the realities of the twentieth-century political and social developments. No other group of intellectuals (with otherwise no common denominator but that of their revolt against the political and cultural conservatism of their time) could relate so jointly to one spiritual ancestor as the German Expressionists did to Friedrich Nietzsche. Therefore, when at the beginning of the famous Expressionism debate of the 1930s Gyorgy Lukacs made the claim that Expressionism had been a foreplay to national socialism, it actually seemed to give credence to the label of pioneer of German nationalism previously bestowed upon Nietzsche by the representatives of the "conservative revolution." In view of the widely contested statement by Lukacs, Nietzsche's influence upon the Expressionists has deserved a closer look in order to determine his and their true positions during the sharp turn to the right of German politics and public sentiments during the second decade of the twentieth century. Such a look has now been undertaken, and its findings constitute the subject of the present book.Following a summarizing review of the charges against Nietzsche and the Expressionists as forerunners of German fascism, Taylor presents a systematic analysis of major Expressionists' (including also Dadaists') understanding of Nietzsche's philosophy. Since the stress here is obviously on philosophical connections and influences, the names we encounter are not those of the more popular writers of Expressionist poems and dramas, such as Heym, Stramm, Toller, or Kaiser, but those of the theoretical exponents and practitioners of the Expressionist, as well as Dadaist, movements, above all: Kurt Hiller, Otto Gross, Salomo Friedlander, Anselm Ruest, Hugo Ball, and Richard Huelsenbeck. Thus both the more political branch of Expressionism (Hiller, Gross, and the Berlin Dadaists) and its apolitical side (Friedlander and Ruest) are seen in their relationships to Nietzsche, as well as Expressionism's debt to other German thinkers, either directly or via Nietzsche, e.g. Sigmund Freud (in the case of Gross), Immanuel Kant (in the case of Friedlander), or Max Stirner (in the case of Anselm Ruest). As Taylor is able to demonstrate convincingly, the end of Expressionism in Germany coincided with the end of the left-wing Nietzsche vogue, thus leaving only the representatives of German nationalism and militarism - who, however, distanced themselves from Expressionism - to make their continuing claims upon Nietzsche. But since they also claimed to be the only true heirs of that German culture which had consistently been the object of Nietzche's attacks, they missed the essence of this thinking. Ironically the reason why the Expressionists and especially the Dadaists abandoned Nietzsche was exactly that they, too, considered him too closely tied to the German cultural tradition. The politics of World War I and of the failed postwar revolution caused the Expressionists to take a stand on the question of their becoming politically active or retreating into complete intellectual isolation. Although the lure to either of these positions can be seen in Nietzsche's works, neither the Expressionists nor the philosopher himself was able to harmonize the two polarities of his thinking, and both Lukacs's and the Nazis' attacks against the Expressionists were unwarranted.It is a pity that a book containing so much good information about an important period of German intellectual history is marred by so many flaws. While some of them are simply the result of unsatisfactory proofreading many typographical errors, but also carelessness with names, such as Giinter, instead of Gunter, Martens (61), Hoffmannsthal instead of Hofmannsthal (39), and inconsistent capitalization of "Dionysian" - others seem to reflect the author's all too limited knowledge of German. The latter becomes evident in his retention of the German word Geist in his English translations with both abstract ("spirit of a movement") and concrete ("mind") meanings, but with inconsistent usage of the plural form (cf. 68, 79, 83, 222), or in such phrases as "the Das Forum" and "the Die WeiBen Buecher Verlag." Also Taylor's use of both Burger and "bourgeois" in the English text seems to suggest less a distinction in meaning than an inconsistent usage of the two words. Considering the dilemma that any translator faces with foreign words never having the exact same meaning in another language, would it not be more useful to the reader to explain a word in translation and then use it consistently, rather than to intersperse the English translation with such German words as Geist, geistig, Burger, buergerlich, der Einzige, etc.? If the author of a book on German Expressionism does not assume that his readers will understand his quotations in German, he should also not count on their better understanding if he leaves important key words untranslated.