The role of Faust in the Modern project


As if in continuation of the end of the previous report, the end of which was dedicated to the assessment of the influence of Goethe’s Faust to the twentieth century, the following report highlights the impact of the work of the great German poet of the Modern era in General.
It caused hot discussion, which moved to the blog unlikely. And here are quotes from articles Kurginyan during their presentation all the time supplemented by the speaker – Leonid Ya., and present at the meeting Face of the guests. So all we can do is to publish the theses of the report – extracts from articles of a cycle “the Fate of humanity in the twenty-first century.”


Original taken from svao_eot in the Role of Faust in the Modern project

* * *

The Modern project dies. It argues, for example, T. Mann:
“…For us that is witnessing the dying of an era, the era of the burghers, for us who are destined in the torment and testing of fracture to find the way to new worlds, new spiritual and public life, the third optical the opportunity to see it (Goethe as representative of politicalese, which we call the burgher and the era which begins and ends with the fifteenth century to the nineteenth, is the most close and natural“.
In this passage (1932 – a year before the coming to power of Hitler) Thomas Mann speaks of Goethe as the representative of the epoch which began in the XV century, essentially extended until the end of the XIX century and formally continuing in the twentieth century Thomas Mann calls this the era of the burgher. She also, according to Kurginyan, Modern era, or the era of capitalism (with the inclusion of in this era of protocapitalist).
This era have been exhausted because exhausted the very foundations of the Modern project, which permeated him whole politicalelite. http://svao-eot.livejournal.com/30097.html
For Mann, Goethe hyperconcentrated this era, and reflecting all its brilliance and all its poverty.
The era in its result led to fascism. Borgerstue applauded him in an effort to extend its dominance beyond the era and to compensate them for their historical infertility antihistorical and anti-humanism.
Goethe is the representative of a full-fledged burghers, have not become anti-historical and anti-humanist. But something in this borgerstue already predetermines its future militant antihistoricism and anti-humanism. And that something is the spirit of the burghers. Here, argues Thomas Mann, the problem of peering into Goethe transformed from a philosophical and philological to the philosophical and political.
T. Mann rejected a direct identification with Goethe burgher beginning in its popular sense. At Manna, burgher spiritual pathos of Goethe to make the world a pleasant (Kurginyan: so I want to say “comfortable”) . But how to make a nice world?
Mann writes:
“…Pure hell burgher Goethe but in a higher spiritual sense— means that in “Poetry and truth”, he brings all the pleasantness of life to a natural circulation of external phenomena, the alternation of day and night, seasons, flowering and harvest and all that from epoch to epoch is repeated periodically (the word “natural circulation” selected by Thomas Mann— SK)”.
Acknowledging that pleasure as the highest positive spiritual beginning for Goethe relates to the cyclical, repeatable, Mann further writes:
The fatigue from this natural rhythm of nature and life, he [Goethe] sees downright mental illness, threat to life, the main inducement to suicide“.
T. Mann says that for Goethe the circuit, that is, the eternal return is the quintessence of the highest spiritual benefit, otherwise referred to as pleasantness.
Here there is a connection between the esoteric Nietzsche, based on the eternal return, and spirituality of Goethe, based on amenity arising from the same eternal return. In “the sorrows of young Werther” by Goethe sang Werther weary of the regularity of the rhythm of natural phenomena. Tired of this amenity. Werther, the personification of a protest against the spirit of pleasantness and repetition. The protest ended life-threatening Werther and became a treasured source of motivation to suicide.
Goethe’s anti-revolutionary, and revolution causes disgust him (the author refers to T. Mann). Goethe understood that the Werther all over the world will never accept the great return. And will be against him in different ways to protest, including making the hated Goethe revolution.
Fatigue from the great return — this is the spirit of history. Goethe called this spirit is the source of mental illness, cursed the spirit as the enemy of life. So he embarked on the path of antihistorical, antirevolutionary. This path can have sooner or later anti-humanism. First Goethe. Then Nietzsche. Then Hitler.
It’s a relentless trajectory that describes a metamorphosis of the class, laying the basis of the pleasantness of spirituality, class, are ready to abandon history, even when he is the historical leader. Class anti-revolutionary even when he commits the greatest revolution. This is it, this burgher class. This is it, “the discreet charm of the bourgeoisie”.
The poet NOVALIS, a very fine connoisseur of art, Goethe wrote that for Goethe the “true and immutable is only the economic essence of things“. A romantic lost in it the same way as the poetry of nature and the supernatural. The pleasantness of everyday life that for NOVALIS the pathos of Goethe.
Grace is the pleasure of everyday life — the gift shed upon the world of the great cycle, based on eternal return. The eternal return is possible only in case of rejection of the revolution, romantic energy that is based on hatred of the eternal return and the pleasantness of everyday life. Hatred of the living spirit, housego in the pleasantness of everyday life and the eternal return of the dead spirit.
Russia did not accept the bourgeois spirit (the spirit of a pleasant routine and the eternal return) as the spirit of the dead, from which grew the tree of the Russian revolution, including having Christian roots. To reject the revolution can only rejecting the story, and hence of Christ (no Christ, if there is no history), and humanism (which cannot be reduced to allegedly anti-Christian Renaissance). At the core of anti-humanism and antistatichnost lies the reduction of everything to the economic nature of things, that is, the relegation of man to things and things to the product.
Therefore, in the XXI century, mankind will inevitably have to choose between the available through the Analytics and the phenomenology of Goethe, the spirit of the burghers, and humanism. New humanism and the care of the burghers from the stage of history, either the inhumanity and the preservation of the burghers on the stage posthistorical domination. Other prospects in the XXI century simply does not exist.
According to Schiller, Goethe is the mankind, “do not differ, however, too flattering a view of the person and humanity“. That is, of mankind, benevolently contemptuous of humanity.
Friendly contempt for humanity and the worship of the pleasantness of everyday life and the eternal return… Where it may lead uhh century? Isn’t the project of the Grand Inquisitor?
For me, there is nothing more dangerous than a friendly contempt for humanity. Is it malevolent to mankind Inquisitor? It and friendly. Moreover, he accuses Christ of malevolence. That Christ gave the people what they cannot. And because did, like as not loving them at all. But I, the Inquisitor, understand the despicable nature of people, but I love this essence, soopasoul their activities with this entity and therefore will be invented so-and-that the glory of the despicable entity that is able to enjoy a pleasant routine only building that I built. And don’t blame me that this building is too reminiscent of a concentration camp. Positioning despicable, but my favorite mankind with a pleasant commonplace only in the building of the eternal return.
Kindly despise humanity realists face a number of challenges.
For example, the problem of lack of resources. Resources for engaging into a pleasant routine of seven or more billion people is not enough. Contempt for these people will lead to the fact that realists do not consider the scenario of the ascent of the human to new heights — what else is there climbing?! But what to do? Like what? — to reduce the number of friendly despised individuals. And why not, if you despise them kindly?
Another problem. It is found that the increasing technological capabilities of humankind does not well compatible with the internal contents of the creature called Homo sapiens. What you need is either cool to change is the internal content, creating a new person, or to reduce the technological possibilities, or… or to take an existing friendly despised person under arbitrarily tight control. If you believe in person, you can begin to fight for his new deeper and more quality content. That is, for a new humanism. But if you despise a person friendly, being a realist, sooner or later will shrug and say, “Well, what did not do it out of goodwill to these despicable creatures! Will have them because of their prizrenski subjected to total psychological control. The benefit appeared to need time to work”.
Another issue — the cost of goodwill. If virtual money at your disposal, constantly decreasing and an increasing share of this money should give to those whom you include with a benevolent contempt, the goodwill will persist only until a certain critical moment.

Translated by Yandex Translate