DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.53068#0370
RAPHAEL
The community of impelling spiritual forces on both sides of the Alps,
already constantly felt, especially in the Romantics, shows itself in Nietzsche’s
words: “The Renaissance displays the awakening of honesty in the South as
does the Reformation in the North.”1 Raphael therefore “did not follow, for
the distance of a single pace, the pretentious, ecstatic piety of many of his
patrons; he preserved his honesty even in that exceptional picture, the Sistine
Madonna. ...” “Artists of all times, in their highest flights, have raised just
these representations to the degree of heavenly transfiguration” (which at that
time Nietzsche thought he recognised for religious and philosophical errors).
They would have been incapable of glorifying them without believing in their
absolute truth. “When once the belief in such truth declines at all. . . that
art can never flourish again which presupposes—like the Divina Commedia, the
pictures of Raphael, Michael Angelo’s frescoes, and the Gothic minsters—not
only a cosmic, but a metaphysical significance in the objects of art. That such
an art, such faith among artists, once existed will become the subject of a moving
legend.”2 Towards the end of his life Nietzsche esteemed Michael Angelo
more highly than Raphael, because Michael Angelo . . . “saw the ideal of a
more distinguished culture than is the Christian culture of Raphael’s type,
whilst Raphael only glorified faithfully and modestly the values that
had been given him, and had in him no yearning instincts that sought some-
thing further”3—but above Raphael and Michael Angelo stands Leonardo,
“thanks to his power of holding fast to an incompleted system”.4 Yet to none
more deservingly than to Raphael could his words possibly be applied for
lodging an appeal against romantic judgments concerning that artist’s end:
“Only the very rarest and best-bred attain, as is just, to the highest and most
noble human joys, in which existence celebrates its own transfiguration. . . .
Then an overflowing wealth of manifold powers and, at the same time, ‘free will’ of
the most instantly adjustable force and masterly control of resources dwell together
affectionately in one and the same human being; the spirit is then on as familiar
terms with the senses, as much at home with them, as the senses are familiar
and at home with the spirit; and anything whatsoever has merely to be enacted
in the one sphere in order to release an extraordinary happiness and activity
in the other. ... It is probable that in such perfect and consummated men the
most sensual accomplishments are ultimately transfigured by an allegorising
ecstasy of the highest spirituality.”5
1 Ed. Musarion, VI, p. 170.
2 Menschliches, Allzumenschliches, IV, 220, “Aus der Seele des Kiinstlers. Das Jenseits in
der Kunst” (ed. Musarion, VIII, p. 188).
3 Nachgelassene Werke, Vol. XIV, Part III, 3—-Kunst und Klinstler, 304. (ed. Musarion XVII,
p. 317).
4 Nachgelassene Werke, Vol. XIII, i, 3—-Studien aus der Umwertungszeit 1882-88, “Weltan-
schauung”, 131. (ed. Musarion XVI, p. 5if).
5 Wille zur Macht, Book IV, 1051 (ed. Musarion, XIX, p. 361).
352
The community of impelling spiritual forces on both sides of the Alps,
already constantly felt, especially in the Romantics, shows itself in Nietzsche’s
words: “The Renaissance displays the awakening of honesty in the South as
does the Reformation in the North.”1 Raphael therefore “did not follow, for
the distance of a single pace, the pretentious, ecstatic piety of many of his
patrons; he preserved his honesty even in that exceptional picture, the Sistine
Madonna. ...” “Artists of all times, in their highest flights, have raised just
these representations to the degree of heavenly transfiguration” (which at that
time Nietzsche thought he recognised for religious and philosophical errors).
They would have been incapable of glorifying them without believing in their
absolute truth. “When once the belief in such truth declines at all. . . that
art can never flourish again which presupposes—like the Divina Commedia, the
pictures of Raphael, Michael Angelo’s frescoes, and the Gothic minsters—not
only a cosmic, but a metaphysical significance in the objects of art. That such
an art, such faith among artists, once existed will become the subject of a moving
legend.”2 Towards the end of his life Nietzsche esteemed Michael Angelo
more highly than Raphael, because Michael Angelo . . . “saw the ideal of a
more distinguished culture than is the Christian culture of Raphael’s type,
whilst Raphael only glorified faithfully and modestly the values that
had been given him, and had in him no yearning instincts that sought some-
thing further”3—but above Raphael and Michael Angelo stands Leonardo,
“thanks to his power of holding fast to an incompleted system”.4 Yet to none
more deservingly than to Raphael could his words possibly be applied for
lodging an appeal against romantic judgments concerning that artist’s end:
“Only the very rarest and best-bred attain, as is just, to the highest and most
noble human joys, in which existence celebrates its own transfiguration. . . .
Then an overflowing wealth of manifold powers and, at the same time, ‘free will’ of
the most instantly adjustable force and masterly control of resources dwell together
affectionately in one and the same human being; the spirit is then on as familiar
terms with the senses, as much at home with them, as the senses are familiar
and at home with the spirit; and anything whatsoever has merely to be enacted
in the one sphere in order to release an extraordinary happiness and activity
in the other. ... It is probable that in such perfect and consummated men the
most sensual accomplishments are ultimately transfigured by an allegorising
ecstasy of the highest spirituality.”5
1 Ed. Musarion, VI, p. 170.
2 Menschliches, Allzumenschliches, IV, 220, “Aus der Seele des Kiinstlers. Das Jenseits in
der Kunst” (ed. Musarion, VIII, p. 188).
3 Nachgelassene Werke, Vol. XIV, Part III, 3—-Kunst und Klinstler, 304. (ed. Musarion XVII,
p. 317).
4 Nachgelassene Werke, Vol. XIII, i, 3—-Studien aus der Umwertungszeit 1882-88, “Weltan-
schauung”, 131. (ed. Musarion XVI, p. 5if).
5 Wille zur Macht, Book IV, 1051 (ed. Musarion, XIX, p. 361).
352