Zarathustra arrived at the crowded places in the buying and selling and he said, "Flee, my friend, into the solitude! I see you so deaf by the noise of great men and stung by the little people. Forests and coral know how to be silent with you. If you are like the tree, a wide-branched tree that you love, calmly and with all of its it heart it puts itself into the sea. Where the solitude stops, the markets begins, and where the market begins, then the noise of great actors will also be started and sough of poisonous crowd of flies."
"Market" is a place where the solitude is actually located : a pseudo togetherness, encounter temporary and lasts only on the surface, a meeting between a number of sellers with a number of buyers, they who at first just thinking about how their own needs met, right?
Model of a market is a place where people near us are our competitors. It urges us to race. We want to beat it and it wants to beat us. In the market, envy is not a wrong feeling. The greedy can be good, and both are institutionalized in a system. Zarathustra wants people from here go to solitude. But silence is one thing, and loneliness is something else, right?
Perhaps we must first talk about the market and solitude, or vice versa: market and togetherness. "Commodity", Marx said, "Looks to any other commodity is only as a form of appearance of its own value".
Perhaps it is time we listen to Nietzsche. Gilles Deleuze, in a bit over-zealous essay, discerned Nietzsche with Marxism and Freudianism. "Marxism and psychoanalysis in some sense fundamentally bureaucratic form -- which one is public, other is private -- aims to re-codification, in one way or another, unceasingly been separated of code in our cultural horizons. Nietzsche's concern lies elsewhere: to overcome all the codes of the past, present and future, to transmit something and will not let himself be codified".
For Deleuze, codification is reaching into all corners of life, in the form of laws, contracts, institutions. He was of course talking about the people of Europe. Nietzsche --- as the voice of liberation, even as the sound which received the chaos as an important part of life -- indeed seems to be an interpretation theme of Zarathustra's author since two decades ago.
Basically what causes Nietzsche so kicking and stomping is the bourgeois men at the end of the 19th century: "men with" little goals, little certainty, vile and inadequate". Presumably that is described by Zarathustra in the market: "little people", "poisonous flies".
Eagleton, a Marxist, tried to explain further what exactly was witnessed by Nietzsche: motionless German's middle class : the middle class who are generally satisfied to gain influence in the Bismarck's autocratic regime and do not want to show a significant political challenge.
This is the bourgeoisie which releases "revolutionary role in history," Eagleton said. Strong class but still choose to tame and forwards the advantages of capitalism which paired from above by Bismarck-style protectionist country. The country is also to provide protection to what is then quickly becomes the largest socialist party in the world.
Under the further market economy society, Bismarck and government structure did not exist anymore. The capital and the entrepreneur had presented major cities, glorious technological achievements, wealth and powerfull productivity, which even so memorable to the Communist Manifesto compilers. But apparently , not much had changed in the theme of "we do not feel at home" in a society that was organized and directed by bourgeois expectations. Indeed, life and a living) was stable and generally insufficient, but men -- and especially men who expect not only dignity but also a blessing, figures that certainly wanted happiness and salvation in the next world -- had become conformists who lived in every corner. Competition was encouraged, but on the other side, the entire energy led to a focus : the result's accumulation. Became a focus finally was felt only to bring "the herd", a set of copies of flat human. Strong individuals -- entrepreneurs, and political leaders -- ultimately more like hunters who dared to take risks in a jungle that had become a zoo.
Nietzsche presents Zarathustra as an ideal counterpoint. Zarathustra teaches about the Ubermensch. As he said, "I teach you the Main Man".
Zarathustra, as we know, just has a heart to those who are solitary, noble, affirmative, such as tall trees overhanging wholeheartedly into the sea. It seems he never talks about those who lost the battle of life, on the trampled grass. What happen to them? What will happen? Deserves to be oppressed?
In Nietzsche's utopia, there is a power that has nothing to do with the throne, treasure and effective governance tool. In fact, in the words of Michel Haar, those who actually rule and master, are those who also become the part of the slave class. For the Main Man, the power is creative power, because the Ubermensch is a manifestation of life itself.
But Haar still did not mention how those who lost the battle and competition. Zarathustra would probably treat them like he treated the stunt man who fell, seriously wounded and dying in prologue section 6 and 7.
To him, Zarathustra just said, "You have made danger becomes your calling, no one should be condemned. Now you gone through the call. Then let my hands will bury you."
In other words, death and defeat is part of life. Both should be accepted. And only those who dare to take the danger who eligible for the honor, although they only find failure. Zarathustra is a tragic voice.
We will easily accept a picture of life that when we are not in the position of the stuntman. This guy actually becoming a stunt performer was not because he had made "the danger to be a call". He was not really heroic. In the lap of Zarathustra, the dying person actually said, "I am nothing more than an animal that is being taught to dance by blows and hunger". And he was dead.
Until the market was over, even until late into the night and the wind began to blow, Zarathustra still be near the corpse. There was a sense of sad in his heart. It turned out that life still had no meaning. The stuntman died because a clown suddenly came disrupt the show in the middle of the market. Did Zarahustra move by the fact that on that day someone danced until the end because wracked by beatings and hunger? No. It seemed, no. In front of the poor body, he just decided to teach humans about the meaning of life, the Ubermensch.
Zarathustra does not get around, that the dance is born not forever because of the feeling of happiness and ecstasy, but also because the calculation of the instrumental sense: how to market themselves and get the results. Zarathustra does not see that the poor stuntman becomes the part of "little people" because he practically has no other choice. Zarathustra also does not contemplate that in the market there are people who want to enjoy the acrobatics, and willing to exchange it for bread. But as such, then what appears is not only the "herd". What is also shown is the market as a heterogeneity.
Humans come. Varied. Crowded. Naturally, each wants to meet their individual interests, but the market (and not an abstract concept of "the market") are not only made up of poisonous flies and loudmouth actor.
***
[CZ-lacalifusa021414]
No comments:
Post a Comment