Apollo and Dionysus: The Duality of Passion and Rationality in the Evolution of Art and Greatness
theshreddedsage.substack.com
I am capable of loving as much as I am predisposed to the capacity for cruelty and punishment. The underlying theme in Nietzsche's 'The Birth of Tragedy' is the evolution of art in the Greek world. Although it is not explicitly stated in the text, I offer you this information: From the 8th century BC up to the late 5th century in Ancient Greece, one can observe the stark difference in attitudes towards metaphysics and the gods. For example, in the 6th century, the pressing question for tragedy playwrights was, 'Are the gods just?' Conversely, the 5th century, which we could define as the age of the philosophers, was concerned with the question of whether there were any gods at all. The way in which one god was portrayed in the Hellenic epoch could also vary drastically depending on the style of media the author employed. Dionysus appears as a jester and comedian in many comedies while also being a harbinger of chaos and death in tragedy. This capriciousness harks back to the Nietzschean idea of using Apollo and Dionysus as metaphors to describe a balance between rationale (Apollonian) and passion (Dionysian). This union, just as we see in other cultures and ecclesiastical institutions, is a recurring theme and often dictates the quality of art such cultures are able to produce. That is, without the Apollonian characteristics, an artist lacks direction and focus, and without the Dionysian, they lack the passion and degeneracy necessary for great art. This distinction and classification of Ancient Greece as a balance of chaos and rationale are unfamiliar to most. The average person would associate rationale with Ancient Greece; perhaps they would refer to Pythagoras to justify such a view. But Pythagoras was more mystical than most know; in fact, we do not even know if his school was responsible for the famous Pythagorean theorem. This is also the case with Plato; many of his doctrines, in his own words, were unteachable as they escaped the boundaries of articulation, being, in a sense, esoteric and metaphysical. How did Ancient Greece produce such geniuses and meaningful pieces of art with such a minuscule population if they were not rational and constantly philosophizing? This question seems to soothe our modern anxieties about the future; we wish to employ a more rational perspective on Ancient Greece because it suits our notions of what intellect and innovation are, perhaps we lack the controlled chaos evident in the Dionysian aspect of Ancient Greek culture.
Apollo and Dionysus: The Duality of Passion and Rationality in the Evolution of Art and Greatness
Apollo and Dionysus: The Duality of Passion…
Apollo and Dionysus: The Duality of Passion and Rationality in the Evolution of Art and Greatness
I am capable of loving as much as I am predisposed to the capacity for cruelty and punishment. The underlying theme in Nietzsche's 'The Birth of Tragedy' is the evolution of art in the Greek world. Although it is not explicitly stated in the text, I offer you this information: From the 8th century BC up to the late 5th century in Ancient Greece, one can observe the stark difference in attitudes towards metaphysics and the gods. For example, in the 6th century, the pressing question for tragedy playwrights was, 'Are the gods just?' Conversely, the 5th century, which we could define as the age of the philosophers, was concerned with the question of whether there were any gods at all. The way in which one god was portrayed in the Hellenic epoch could also vary drastically depending on the style of media the author employed. Dionysus appears as a jester and comedian in many comedies while also being a harbinger of chaos and death in tragedy. This capriciousness harks back to the Nietzschean idea of using Apollo and Dionysus as metaphors to describe a balance between rationale (Apollonian) and passion (Dionysian). This union, just as we see in other cultures and ecclesiastical institutions, is a recurring theme and often dictates the quality of art such cultures are able to produce. That is, without the Apollonian characteristics, an artist lacks direction and focus, and without the Dionysian, they lack the passion and degeneracy necessary for great art. This distinction and classification of Ancient Greece as a balance of chaos and rationale are unfamiliar to most. The average person would associate rationale with Ancient Greece; perhaps they would refer to Pythagoras to justify such a view. But Pythagoras was more mystical than most know; in fact, we do not even know if his school was responsible for the famous Pythagorean theorem. This is also the case with Plato; many of his doctrines, in his own words, were unteachable as they escaped the boundaries of articulation, being, in a sense, esoteric and metaphysical. How did Ancient Greece produce such geniuses and meaningful pieces of art with such a minuscule population if they were not rational and constantly philosophizing? This question seems to soothe our modern anxieties about the future; we wish to employ a more rational perspective on Ancient Greece because it suits our notions of what intellect and innovation are, perhaps we lack the controlled chaos evident in the Dionysian aspect of Ancient Greek culture.