and Goethe a Faust’ (ibid). The difference of identity between the two is
necessary to the artistic process.
For Nietzsche, this also sheds light on Wagner’s embrace of ascetic
ideals. Nietzsche argues that Wagner was attempting to assimilate his
identity with his own creation; Parsifal, by also embracing vegetarianism
and chastity just as the character does (pp. 69-71).
Secondly, it should be acknowledged that the suffering that went into a
piece came from and was fully experienced by the artist in the creative
process but, this suffering is to be forgotten if one to is to truly appreciate
the piece. This is beautifully compared to a pregnant mother’s suffering in
the form of ‘nausea and odd cravings of pregnancy: which, as I said, must
be forgotten if she is to enjoy the child’ (p.71). In Nietzsche’s example
of Parsifal, he notes that the suffering that came about from Wagner’s
own spiritual conflicts and repression of his will led to the creation of the
opera. Wagner did not make it through the creative process unscathed
and at any distance from the suffering that made the art.
Nietzsche’s conclusion of these premises brings him back to his original
question; ‘So what do ascetic ideals mean? In the case of an artist, we
have concluded: nothing at all!’ (p.72). Although not explicitly stated in
the text, what I believe is a reasonable interpretation, is that through the
act of creating art the artist unburdens his suffering into the art. Since the
artist is not identical with what he creates, the suffering is no longer part of
him. Ascetic ideals are therefore meaningless to an artist because artists
can relieve themselves of suffering instead of voluntarily embracing and
seeking out suffering under some belief that the suffering will benefit
them to such an extent that the suffering is justified. Compared to the
philosopher and the priestly cast, the artist is the only one who can
overcome the ascetic ideal. Furthermore, there is added utility in the
artist’s creative process in that he can transform suffering into beauty,
which manifests as the piece of art.
So how does this relate back to The Birth of Tragedy? I would argue that
combined, The Birth of Tragedy and The Genealogy of Moralsgive us a
complete account of the utility of art against suffering. In The Genealogy
of Morals, Nietzsche considers this utility from the artist’s perspective
and how the act of creating art to relieve suffering can prevent one from
turning to asceticism, which, as discussed, is a flawed method of dealing
60