32 pages • 1 hour read
Friedrich NietzscheThe Birth of Tragedy
Nonfiction | Book | Adult | Published in 1872A modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.
Chapters 11-15Chapter Summaries & Analyses
Chapters 11-15 Summary
Euripides brought about a turning point in Greek tragedy. Among his reforms were a deemphasis on the chorus and the use of rational argument in the dialog. These changes, according to Nietzsche, signal the influence of Socratic philosophy and, thus, the triumph of optimistic and rational Apolline values, which emphasize “morality and philosophy” and “redemption through illusion” over tragic Dionysiac ones. Euripides “brought the spectator on to the stage” (57), portraying commonplace characters in his plays and fostering a more democratic spirit. In a sense, Euripides wrote tragedies for people who did not like or understand tragedy (the “second spectator”), and Nietzsche believes that his plays mark the loss of the traditional Greek tragic spirit. The growth of the New Comedy during the Attic period of Greek literature signals tragedy’s loss of status.
With the decay of authentic tragedy, a mood of complacent “cheerfulness” entered Greek culture, which later eras would mistake for the true spirit of ancient Greece. This cheerfulness was in fact a mask to cover the tragic realities which the Greek people no longer wanted to face.
Euripides’s reforms of drama were influenced by his contemporary, the philosopher Socrates. Socrates was critical of tragedy and of art in general because, in his view, it is irrational and artificial, failing to “tell what’s true” (68). Socrates reversed the conventional roles of instinct and consciousness, emphasizing that artistic creation should be rational (i.e., conscious) while claiming that he heard an instinctive voice of wisdom (daimonion) in his inner conscience that gave him moral advice. Not only did Socrates believe that reality was reasonable and that knowledge was the key to happiness, but he died for this belief, thus inspiring countless future generations in their pursuit of rational knowledge.
Socratic rationalism entered into the bloodstream of Western culture, informing the pursuit of scientific knowledge, which is predicated on the optimistic view that nature can be conquered. Nietzsche argues that we face a crisis because science will eventually reach its limits, and the original hope and optimism that marked the human quest will collapse. At that point human beings will rediscover “tragic knowledge” and its expression through art, which alone will allow them to bear the painful reality of existence. Such a revival of the tragic spirit will be the subject of the next and final section.
Chapters 11-15 Analysis
The second group of chapters describes the “death” of Greek tragedy after its golden age. Once again, Nietzsche’s analysis is highly subjective: Euripides is commonly viewed as one of the three major Greek tragedians, with Aeschylus and Sophocles, and is not widely regarded (outside of The Birth of Tragedy) as having initiated tragedy’s decline. Nevertheless, Nietzsche’s argument centers on the changes that Euripides brought to the classic form of tragedy as practiced by its first two masters. Euripides was the last of this trio of playwrights, and he is considered to be the one whose plays are most preoccupied with intellectual or philosophical questions. For Nietzsche, this marks a decline because he views Reason as Decline, Not Progress, and objects to Euripides’s betrayal of the original Dionysian spirit of tragedy.
Euripides is known to have been a friend of Socrates, and like Socrates he questioned the validity of the gods, myths, and legends of Greek religion. For Nietzsche, this counts against Euripides because it means that he did not accept the mythic basis of tragedy, with its emphasis on implacable fate, but instead tried to “rationalize” it by introducing philosophical themes and arguments. The fact that Euripides is often considered the first “psychological realist” in drama would presumably be a demerit in the eyes of Nietzsche, who in Chapter 7 expressed his preference for a non-naturalistic style in the arts, as embodied in the Greek chorus.
Euripides’s negative influence on Greek drama (for Nietzsche) is traceable to his alliance with Socrates, who symbolizes the triumph of rationality and a scientific mindset in Nietzsche’s thought. Socrates devoted his philosophical career to cultivating a spirit of skepticism of established beliefs and a critical inquiry into the nature of truth. This led Socrates to regard the traditional Greek myths as simply a collection of tales rather than an authoritative religion demanding worship and obedience. Although Nietzsche is not defending belief in deities per se, he sees such beliefs as expressions of a larger belief in the universal will which controls nature and human life—a reality which we ignore at our peril. Nietzsche’s book is thus both a revisionist interpretation of ancient Greek culture and a pointed critique of the rational, scientific tendencies of contemporary Western culture.
In his anti-rationalism, Nietzsche continues one of the major currents of Romantic thought. Romantic thinkers questioned the optimistic rationalism of the Enlightenment, which exalted science as the key to human happiness and progress. Instead, the Romantics emphasized the importance of emotion and intuition in human life, as well as mythology and The Redemptive Power of Art in human society. In reversing the normally high valuation given to Socrates, Nietzsche is again using a figure from ancient history symbolically: as a stand-in for modern Enlightenment-derived rationalism, which he staunchly rejects.
Related Titles
By Friedrich Nietzsche
