Re: Gobineau, the "Bayreuth Circle" and Schemann

On Sat, 29 Nov 2003 05:30:22 -0800, Laon wrote:

> Derrick Everett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
<snip>
> 
> 
>> "Heroism and Christianity" [...] has to be read against the background
>> of Wagner's earlier writings and in the context of his interaction with
>> Gobineau, with whom he was attempting a reconciliation.
> 
> By "reconciliation" do you mean there had been a quarrel between the two
> men, that Wagner was seeking to reconcile? Or just that Wagner was
> seeking to reconcile his views with Gobineau's as far as possible?

Yes, to both questions.  You quoted from Cosima's diary entry for 14
February 1881.  As noted in that diary entry, Wagner had already begun to
form an opinion (mostly negative) about Gobineau's racial theories.  At
that time he had not, however, actually begun to read Gobineau's "Essai
sur l'inegalité des race humaines"!  His first knowledge of the "Essai"
had been obtained secondhand, in the book by Professor Pott, mentioned by
Cosima in that diary entry. The title of Pott's book, incidentally, is,
"The inequality of the human races mainly from the linguistic point of
view, by considering in particular the work carrying the same title of the
count of Gobineau". Wagner finished reading it on 3 March 1881.  Wagner
had understood from Prof. Pott's book that Gobineau's asserted the
importance of "racial strength".

He then proceeded to read Gobineau's "Essai", but obviously found it heavy
going and soon put it to one side, unfinished. Already on 14 February he
announced the title of his proposed Gobineau article, "Heroism and
Christianity". Cosima does not record what were Wagner's initial ideas for
the article, although we can assume that it was from the beginning a
response to Gobineau, and that Wagner's main point was that, "what really
matters is something different from racial strength".

Gobineau had been invited to visit the Wagner family in Bayreuth, but
through some misunderstanding arrived in the absence of Richard and
Cosima, who were in Berlin for Angelo Neumann's production of the "Ring".
On their return, Gobineau was shown every courtesy, but it was not long
before the fundamental disagreements between the two men led to heated
arguments; see for example the diary entry for 18 May.  By 3 June Wagner
was "downright explosive in favour of Christian theories in contrast to
racial ones".  Gobineau left Bayreuth on 7 June and, to judge from the
letter he wrote to Wagner on the following day, the dust had not yet
settled.

Gobineau set down the points on which he disagreed with Wagner in a letter
that he wrote to Cosima on 29 July.  It was perhaps to avoid a complete
rupture that he did not write about their differences to Wagner himself.
The letter of 29 July is not only an indirect response to Wagner, but also
to Cosima's half-sister Claire, who had made some comments on the "Essai"
after Cosima had asked her to help in finding a publisher for the second
edition.  Obviously Cosima was doing all she could to maintain a good
relationship with Gobineau.

Meanwhile Wagner took up the "Essai" again and finished it this time, in
August 1881.  He then began writing his article, "Heroism and
Christianity", which begins with conciliatory statements about Gobineau
and his ideas ...


> At the beginning of "Heroism and Christianity" Wagner calls Gobineau
> "one of the cleverest man of our day" and says his theories have the
> "most terrible force of conviction" [from _Religion and Art_, vol 6 of
> the Ellis translation of Wagner's prose, page 275].
> 
> That looks like an endorsement of Gobineau's views, but in fact stops
> just short of that. You can call someone clever without meaning they are
> correct, and you can call their arguments terribly convincing, without
> necessarily meaning that you're convinced by them.
> 
> It's not so unusual to use that kind of careful phrasing about a
> friend's book - or their cooking. If a friend of mine wrote (say) a
> well-researched and well-argued book arguing that an asteroid is likely
> to slam into the earth in the next 300 years, destroying all life, or at
> least all mammalian life, I'd be too cheerful to believe it, and I'd
> come up with some tech reasons to back me up. But I could still say,
> with complete honesty, that my friend was extremely clever and his
> arguments had a terrible force of conviction. (And I wouldn't mention
> that I personally remained unconvinced.)  Wagner's words are consistent
> with that polite approach.
> 
> Moreover, it appears that Wagner had Gobineau in mind as his audience as
> he wrote "Heroism and Christianity". If we consider the essay as
> addressed personally to Gobineau, we can see why Wagner chose his words
> carefully.

<snip>


> The words "writing his article with Gob. in mind" most likely meant that
> Wagner felt he was addressing Gobineau in particular. Wagner could have
> simply meant that the article would discuss Gobineau's ideas, but why
> would Wagner bother to make such an inane comment if that was all he
> meant? The article was about Gobineau's ideas from the moment Wagner
> conceived it. So it seems more likely that the words "with Gob. in mind"
> meant "with Gobineau in mind as reader".
> 
As soon as the article was finished, on 17 September, Wagner sent a copy
to Gobineau.  There can be no doubt that it was intended, from the
beginning, as a response to Gobineau.  The fundamental disagreement
between the two men is obscured, however, by the conciliatory tone of the
article, and by what seems to be a genuine attempt to take Gobineau's
ideas seriously -- despite Wagner's resistance to those ideas, documented
in Cosima's diary and in her correspondence with Gobineau.



> He proposed a solution that was not just non-racist but was overtly
> anti-racist: that all races could rise to equality and even lose their
> individual racial characteristics through mixing, if this was done in a
> way that is informed by the Christian moral virtues of compassion,
> world-renunciation, sacrifice and service, and by communal rituals like
> communion and, Wagner suggested, certain kinds of art events.
>  
>  
> A final point about "Heroism and Christianity" is that Wagner suggested
> that there would be fewer wars if people moved from the cold climates in
> which he thought the bulk of humanity lived to warmer and more pleasant
> climates. Of course, various indigenous peoples who already lived in
> those warmer climes might have something to say about that. So in 1882
> Wagner failed to have a post-colonialist worldview. This is regrettable
> but not surprising in a 19th century European. I mention it for
> completeness' sake.
> 
> 
Wagner had recently developed an interest in the ideas of the vegetarian
Gleizès, after he had been sent a copy of the latter's pamphlet
"Thalaysia".  Wagner had already developed the view that meat-eating was a
necessary evil for people living in cold climates (see the note he made on
this subject while staying with Eliza Wille at Mariafeld in 1864 -
Ellis's translation of the "Prose Works", vol.8, page 386) -- although,
according to Gleizès, it contributed to their degeneration.  If we follow
this line of reasoning to its logical conclusion, it implies that the
noblest part of humanity lives (on fruit and nuts, presumably) in the
"warmer and more pleasant climates".  On the evening before he died Wagner
said that he would like to emigrate to Ceylon.

-- 
Derrick Everett   (deverett at c2i.net)
==== Writing from  59°54'N 10°36'E ====
http://home.c2i.net/monsalvat/index.htm