|
|
Post by Tomas on Mar 25, 2021 16:36:56 GMT
[quote author=" cato" [/quote] I had a former house mate (unlucky in love at the time) who loved reading aloud late at night Schopenhauer's less than flattering remarks about women. I wonder has he been deplatformed in modern universities as he was a genuine bona fide misogynist? [/quote] Recall smooth song "Isn't It A Pity?" from the 1950s (?), with that rhyming line: "my nights were sour, spent with Schopenhauer" 😂 Strauss was a romantic, not looking down on his women around. Tempestuous marriage was another chapter. But who knows whether mad philosophy in behind not made it more challenged. |
|
|
|
Post by Tomas on Mar 25, 2021 16:39:43 GMT
This thread must be the most meandering/changing the topic thread ever. Have a glance at how we hop from subject to subject. It reminds me of certain bar stool conversations. Yes. Remember those? Mea culpa for meandering. Will we be seated in wheelchairs before the bar stools be allowed again? |
|
|
|
Post by Maolsheachlann on Mar 25, 2021 16:40:10 GMT
This thread must be the most meandering/changing the topic thread ever. Have a glance at how we hop from subject to subject. It reminds me of certain bar stool conversations. Yes. Remember those? I do indeed. I was never much of pub-goer but I do miss them. Nealon's in Capel Street especially. It had a window onto the street, an open fire, a big decorated mirror, a TV that was always muted, discoloured plasterwork on the ceiling, and smoky pictures of Irish. I miss it. |
|
|
|
Post by assisi on Mar 25, 2021 19:58:55 GMT
Several among the most influential have definitely let their personal affairs affect the "ideas" in an important way. As a sidenote I found in biography how composer Richard Strauss and his friends were somehow surprisingly much into Schopenhauer in the early years, roughly around the 1880s when he apparently was much in evidence all over Germany as also the ever present cultural dignitary of the time Freud, shaping "ideas" for a whole generation it seems. Thinking about Strauss, he was a Modernist musically but certainly one raised in the grandest veins of Tradition ("Haydn, Mozart, Mendelssohn") and, probably, pursuing Modernity most of all as a space for exalted freedom and pleasure as well as a cultural adventure. Compared to the other names mentioned, and to which many more could be added like Nietsczhe and later ones, what they most had in common may even prove to be, broadly, the utterly personal link to the source labeled Modernism. Their personal feelings meant more than the philosophy in such sense. It was not the ideas themselves that was the root problem then. Often the same happens now, not only in politics or art but more or less every field. The Zeitgeist can always be taken as the thing with which you can explain away any consequences of personal sins, only regretted in hindsight, actually what influences the most but naturally only there as hidden from the public surface. If experimentations be allowed, you have a poetic license to do anything. So Modernism is still working a one-sweep-covers-all kind of shield. It might sum up most of the situation we have to face by the *global city* (rather that than Village irl sadly) of today. When the actual sins are cut off from both narrative and experience of living, what remains is like a shadow of the fundamentals of the real problem. Which makes it impossible to solve in the doubtful bargain! Left for the time being, would be only to wait or pray for conversion... I think it was E. Michael Jones who pointed out that Nietzsche was enamoured with Wagner at the time of Tristan and Isolde as it was a work dealing with desire and passion and this reflected Nietzsche's own feelings. However Nietzsche was to turn against Wagner after Parsifal as that opera dealt with Christian themes which Nietzsche didn't like and accused Wagner of 'falling at the feet of the Cross’. |
|
