As promised, I am continuing my series on
the philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche.
In the first episode, titled 'Zarathustra's
Whip', I focused on Nietzsche's definition
of truth, and I showed that it is to be understood
in the aesthetic sense.
Since Nietzsche does not believe that we can
find a worldview that reflects the absolute
truth about reality, he rejects the search
for absolute truth which was the main goal
of philosophy since Socrates.
Instead, he talks about creating a worldview,
which is in line with all the known facts,
and is an expression of your will to power.
Our second video, therefore, will focus on
the act of creation, and how it is understood
in Nietzsche's work.
But I ended that video by mentioning another
artist and thinker.
I pointed out that Nietzsche's philosophy,
in my humble opinion, has some weaknesses.
Especially, I believe that his ethics are
deficient in creating a truly moral way of
life.
But I believe that these deficiencies can
be fixed, and it is in the work of David Bowie,
perhaps the most Nietzschean artist ever,
that I find the ideas that pretty much plug
the holes in Nietzsche's philosophy.
In the future, I intend to do an entire series
on Bowie.
In this video, I am going to do just a teaser,
by showing how Bowie dealt with the question
we are dealing with here, the question about
the way of the creating one.
Our main focus is still on Nietzsche, and
since this is a series, I think I should begin
by providing a very brief biography of his
life and work, up to the point we are going
to discuss in this video.
The details will be filled in in subsequent
videos.
Friedrich Nietzsche was born in Prussia, in
1844.
At age 20 he started learning theology, aiming
to follow in the footsteps of his father,
who was a Lutheran pastor.
But within a year he lost his faith, and in
1865 he started learning philosophy and philology
in the University of Leipzig.
At age 24, he was already made professor of
philology in the University of Basel.
In the same year, 1868, Nietzsche met his
idol, the composer Richard Wagner, and became
part of his close circle of friends.
The two found common ground mainly in their
adoration of the philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer,
who was the main philosophical influence on
both of them.
In 1872, Nietzsche published his first book,
The Birth of Tragedy from the Spirit of Music,
a book that is dedicated to Wagner and is imbued
with his spirit, although it already displays
Nietzsche's independent and brilliant mind.
In the next few years, Nietzsche published
four essays that became known as Untimely
Meditations, in which he continues to criticize
the philosophy of his time while eulogizing
Schopenhauer and Wagner as an alternative,
although at the same time criticizing them
as well.
Throughout this period, Nietzsche suffered
from a serious disease.
People of the Victorian Age did not discuss
such matters publicly, so we don't know for
sure, but the symptoms suggest that it was
syphilis, which was incurable at the time.
The disease severely limited Nietzsche's ability
to function, but it also became a central
part in his philosophical outlook.
Triumphing over the disease, overcoming the
limits it put on him and continuing to do
his work, gave him joy, and this joy was one
of his main insights about existence.
It became his mission to overcome all the
diseases of the Western spirit, to create
a philosophy that is a joyous triumph over
them.
In 1878, his health became so bad that he
had to quit his job in the university, and
for the next decade he was an independent
thinker, until he finally succumbed to the
disease.
In the same year, 1878, Nietzsche published
the book Human, All Too Human, which begins
the critical and negative part of his work.
The book is essentially an attack on 19th
century thought, which focused on Man.
While the philosophy of previous centuries
tried mainly to figure out the truth about
the universe, in the 19th century it was accepted
that human's ability to know the universe
is limited by Man's narrow perception, so
philosophy turned instead to study Man himself,
and figure out how he can be perfected.
But Nietzsche points out that all of these
philosophers are judging humanity by contemporary
humans, not realizing that humans have changed
through the ages.
So their belief that they are discovering
universal truths about humanity has no grounds
to stand on.
It leads him to the argument that all of our
so-called philosophical certainties are merely
constructs, that have evolved over time.
In 1881, he continued this line in his book
The Dawn of Day, in which he concentrates
his attack on Western morality.
Again, the argument is that we mistakenly
believe that our values of good and bad are
universal and eternal, when in fact, they
have changed and evolved through history.
Nietzsche doesn't offer any alternatives at
this stage - he only exposes the contingency
of anything that was held as certain.
This stage will later be very influential
on the post-modernist philosophers.
In 1882, in his book The Gay Science, Nietzsche
begins to develop a positive philosophy, the
philosophy which we shall expound in this
series.
And a year later came Thus Spake Zarathustra,
a book which, I argue, is a literary expression
of the philosophical journey that he went
through in the Gay Science.
It was this book that we focused on in the
previous video, and in this video we are still
within its pages.
So, let's see what Zarathustra has to tell
us about the way of the creating one.
One of the first speeches that Zarathustra
gives is called 'The Three Metamorphoses',
and in it he talks about three stages that
one's spirit has to go through.
The first stage is the camel stage, and it
is basically the learning stage.
You have to load your spirit with all the
heaviest spiritual burdens, all the trials
which past thinkers have went through.
The spirit is expanded by experiencing the
work of others.
In Nietzsche's own biography, this would span
the period when he was a student, and when
he was developing his thought mainly through
appropriating Schopenhauer and Wagner.
But the camel then takes all of this spiritual
load and runs with it to the desert, where
he has to deal with it on its own.
There, the spirit needs to become a lion.
In the lion stage, you fight against all of
these past philosophies, criticize them, refute
them, and set yourself free from them.
Nietzsche likens this spiritual load to a
great dragon, which wants you to obey it,
as it represents the wisdom of thousands of
years.
But the lion wants to act on his own will.
By fighting against this dragon, liberating
itself of its overbearing power, the spirit
becomes strong.
The lion represents the critical stage in
Nietzsche's work, the one that begins with
'Human, All Too Human'.
But the spirit must not stop there.
It needs to go through another metamorphosis.
Now that the spirit is strong, it can create
its own values, its own philosophy.
But it is not the lion that should do that.
The spirit must then become a child, a child
that is newly born, and doesn't care about
the past.
The act of creation, then, must not be done
by building on what others have done, which
is what the camel would do.
It also should not be done by negating others,
as the lion would do.
The camel and lion stages were necessary only
to forge the spirit, and make it strong and
rich enough for a new creation.
At this point, it can become a child, and
create something wholly new and original.
Later on, Zarathustra gives a speech called
'The Thousand and One Goals'.
In this speech, he basically addresses moral
relativism.
He claims that every nation has its own set
of values, its own hierarchy of good and bad.
This is in line with the relativistic stance
which Nietzsche held during his critical stage,
when he claimed that all values are created
by humans, and are dependent upon the time
and place of their creation.
However, here we see something new: a principle
which all of these value systems have in common.
"A table of excellencies hangeth over every
people," says Zarathustra, "Lo!
It is the table of their triumphs; lo!
It is the voice of their Will to Power."
This is the first time we encounter this concept
– Will to Power – in Nietzsche's work.
He doesn't explain it yet, but we see that
it has something to do with the overcoming
of difficulties.
The thing that all of these value systems
have in common, preaches Zarathustra, is that
they represent the hardest thing that that
nation had to overcome.
Overcoming it thus became its highest good.
So, we are seeing Nietzsche abandoning his
relativistic stance, and determining that
all people are driven by Will to Power.
And it is the Will to Power that is at the
basis of every value system.
Further on in that same chapter, Zarathustra
says: "Valuing is creating: hear it, ye creating
ones!
Valuation itself is the treasure and jewel
of the valued things…
Change of values—that is, change of the
creating ones.
Always doth he destroy who hath to be a creator."
So the act of creation also means change of
values.
If you create something original, then you
are destroying at least part of the old valuation
system, and changing the definitions of good
and bad.
He continues: "Creating ones were first of
all peoples, and only in late times individuals;
verily, the individual himself is still the
latest creation."
So there was a time when all creation was
done in the name of the group, and only lately
did it become an individual thing.
What happened to cause this change?
Zarathustra says: "Peoples once hung over
them tables of the good.
Love which would rule and love which would
obey, created for themselves such tables."
So there was a time in which the values that
groups created were created out of love for
the entire group.
"Older is the pleasure in the herd than the
pleasure in the ego: and as long as the good
conscience is for the herd, the bad conscience
only saith: ego."
At that ancient time, only immoral people
were selfish.
But then, "Verily, the crafty ego, the loveless
one, that seeketh its advantage in the advantage
of many—it is not the origin of the herd,
but its ruin."
So, at some point, values were created not
out of love for the group.
They only pretended to be for the group, for
the advantage of the many.
But actually they were the expression of a
crafty ego, driven by selfish motives.
We shall understand this part better when
we discuss Nietzsche's concept of slave morality.
Anyway, these values destroyed the group,
made the individuals in it miserable.
And that opened the way for the individual
to assert itself, to become the one who has
to express his own Will to Power, and create
new values.
Almost immediately after that, Zarathustra
begins to discuss this individual, in a speech
called 'The Way of the Creating One'.
This speech is the focus of this video, so
we are now going to analyze it in full.
Our values, says Zarathustra, have been created
by the group we grew up in.
And since these are group values, we believe
that individualism is bad.
But at some point, your conscience might not
allow you to remain in the group, might realize
that its values are wrong.
You will then have to perform the painful
act of overcoming your herd mentality, and
go your own way, to find new values.
However, says Zarathustra, not everyone is
worthy of leaving the group.
You have to be powerful enough to create new
values.
Just rebelling, and saying you'll go your
own way, is worthless if you don't have within
you the power to create values to live by.
How does one gain that power?
Well, we've already answered that: by going
through the three metamorphoses of the spirit,
developing it to be rich and powerful enough
that it can compel the stars to revolve around
you.
Zarathustra makes the distinction between
freedom from and freedom to, and asserts that
freedom from is not enough.
Just overthrowing your old values, and living
without any rules, is not freedom.
To be really free, you must create a value
system for yourself, based on your own Will,
and live by it.
Zarathustra now begins to speak of the dangers
of this lifestyle.
Becoming an individualist may be liberating
at first, but then you start to feel your
loneliness.
And with that comes self-doubt.
The individualist is hated by those with herd-mentality,
who envy him and want him to fall.
This is another thing that might lead him
to a negative path, and he must learn to transcend
the negative feelings, to kill everything
in himself that holds him back, including
hate to the masses.
Instead, he must blaze a path for them, show
then that there is another way.
Zarathustra here is warning you against those
people who are revered by the herd.
Those people are actually the worst, and you
must beware not to fall for the aura that
is around them.
Those are the people who are trying to reduce
everyone to the same level, to hold back those
who have greatness in them.
This passage is very typical of Nietzsche.
Now he warns you against yourself.
This path is lonely, and you will crave human
contact.
But there are only a few humans who are free
spirits like yourself, and can elevate you
with their friendship.
The rest will only drag you down, so you must
resist the temptation, and keep your distance
from them.
But here is the biggest danger: you are alone
with yourself.
But what is your self?
Those who believe in a soul regard the self
as one entity.
But Nietzsche does not believe in soul, doesn't
believe in the oneness of the self.
The human organism is made of numerous bodies,
it is an amalgamation of many things.
And the self, which belongs to this body,
is also an amalgamation of many things.
So the individual is fractured, and to become
one force, it must struggle to bring together
all of the different forces within it.
The self thus becomes a battlefield.
Parts of the self wage war on other parts,
and then they use them as material in the
act of creation.
Because of the love he feels for himself,
the creator wants to take the parts of himself
that he despises, and make something better
out of them.
Thus, he reshapes and recreates himself as
someone better and more powerful.
Lastly, Zarathustra promises you that justice
will find you in the end.
The masses who despise you today will one
day come to appreciate your worth for them.
So you shouldn't worry about it for now.
What you should focus on is creating beyond
yourself.
In other words, aspire to become greater than
what you are today.
This theme of creating beyond yourself, and
how it comes from a battle within the self,
is further developed in a speech called 'Self-Surpassing'.
And this is actually one of the most pivotal
segments in all of Nietzsche's work.
The speech begins with Zarathustra addressing
the philosophers who say that what drives
them is the will to truth, and tells them
that they are mistaken.
Reality is chaotic and ever-changing, and
has no constant laws or structures that can
be defined.
All of what we believe to be natural laws
are merely constructs that we imposed on reality.
All of our value systems of good and bad are
also just constructs.
And the reason why we are compelled to create
those constructs, he says, is not the will
to truth, but the Will to Power.
And here, finally, he proceeds to explain
what the Will to Power is.
The Will to Power is the will to be more than
what you are.
And because of this will, we all feel compelled
to obey something, obey a set of rules and
values.
We need to construct structures that impose
order and hierarchy on our existence, to give
us a law that is hard for us to obey, because
living according to this law makes us feel
greater.
For most, obedience to a law created by others
is enough.
But those who are more powerful, those who
are capable of obeying themselves, want to
be even greater, to create a new law that
is even harder to live by.
These are the creators, which we have been
portraying until now.
As we have seen, they break away from the
group, away from the value system they grew
up in, and create a new law for themselves
to live by.
But after you did that, after you created
your law, is that enough to satisfy your Will
to Power?
Not at all, says Zarathustra.
Living according to a harder law will reshape
you and make you more powerful, and then,
you will find that this structure is not enough
to contain you, and you will want something
even greater.
"And this secret spake Life herself unto me,"
says Zarathustra, “Behold,” said she,
“I am that WHICH MUST EVER SURPASS ITSELF.""
And he continues: "Whatever I create, and
however much I love it,—soon must I be adverse
to it, and to my love: so willeth my will."
The way of the creating one, then, is a way
of constant self-surpassing.
You create a new values system, a new way
of life that is hard for you to obey, but
obeying it takes you higher, and eventually
you become so powerful that it becomes easy
for you.
Then, that value system becomes your enemy,
the thing that you want to destroy, and create
a new value system, so you can surpass yourself
yet again to become even more powerful.
This is the battlefield of the self that we
mentioned earlier: it is a process of periodically
sacrificing your old self, on the altar of
a new and more powerful self.
Does this process have an end point, a moment
at which there is full satisfaction, and there
can be no structure that is greater?
We shall discuss that in a future video, the
video about the Superman.
For now, I want to talk about one of the problems
that I have with this picture of the creator,
that Nietzsche is portraying for us here.
Zarathustra is describing the path of the
creator as one that is to be taken alone.
You are either part of the herd, and adhere
to its values, or you create your own values
which are yours alone.
The values you create can be useful for others,
but only when they are in the camel stage.
Later they have to discard them and go their
own way.
Other humans, then, have no place in your
own process of creation.
This is the romantic notion of the creator,
and a notion that I do not agree with.
I was reminded of it lately, as I was following
the kerfuffle around 'The Last Jedi', the
latest Star Wars movie.
I am bringing up Star Wars here as a teaser,
because we shall discuss its Nietzschean elements
in one of the future videos in this series.
If you were paying attention, you know that
many Star Wars fans are dissatisfied, in many
cases even livid, about the choices that the
director Rian Johnson made in writing this
movie.
Mark Hamill, better known as Luke Skywalker,
wasn't very happy either.
Here he is talking about it, with Johnson
sitting to his right.
The crowd is cheering, and you probably feel
sympathy to that statement as well, because
we all grew up on the romantic notion that
the artist should not give a damn about what
the crowd wants, and create according to his
or her own vision.
But Hamill doesn't seem pleased with this
answer, and I bet you also feel like there
is something not altogether right here.
So let's try to deconstruct this.
So, Nietzsche is saying that the individual
is on his own.
But, as we recall, the individual is not a
oneness.
The self is fractured.
It is actually constructed of many parts.
And I would like to suggest that these parts
are not unique, but every one of them can
be found in other people.
Not in all people, but in some.
So when we feel alienated to the values of
the group, because there is a part of us that
is dissatisfied with them, this alienation
is also felt by some other members of the
group.
And when we create new values, those other
members can actually identify with these values
and adopt them.
So the act of creation is not an individual
thing – it might be created by one individual,
but that individual is only expressing something
that others feel as well.
And that is why art is something that can
be appreciated by a group of people.
Art is a form of dialogue between humans.
When I create my videos, I do it to please
myself, and create them to express my own
truth.
But I do it assuming that others feel the
same way as me, so I'm going to help them
realize that it is their truth as well.
Or maybe their truth is different, and dealing
with my challenge will help them find it.
So while I create for myself, I also always
imagine what my video will do to the viewers.
I try to express myself in a way that will
entertain them, entice them, move them, disturb
them.
If I aim it at a certain audience, I will
tailor it to its size.
I will say the same thing, but say it in a
way that will be most understood by and most
moving to that particular audience.
In other words, the act of creation is an
act of self-expression, but this self-expression
is couched within a dialogue.
And this, seemingly, is what Rian Johnson
fails to get.
The thing you should disregard is the opinion
of the masses, not the fans.
If you compromise your personal vision because
you want to appeal to the lowest common denominator,
then you have betrayed art.
But if you are working within a franchise,
the fans are not the lowest common denominator.
They are those who have participated in the
journey of creating that franchise, the ones
who represent its spirit.
Your creation should be an expression of that
spirit, with your own personal touch.
Saying that you don't care about the fans'
opinion is an extreme act of selfishness.
In my previous Nietzsche video, I already
pointed out this adjustment which pop culture
has performed on Nietzscheanism.
The pop culture of the 20th century was driven
mainly by music, and 20th century pop music
was very Nietzschean.
Every new musical style was a Dionysian explosion
that shook up the old values, and eventually
created new values.
But this act of destruction and creation was
never done by one individual alone.
It was always a group thing, with many people
participating and influencing each other.
And that, to me, is an improvement on Nietzsche's
philosophy.
In the late sixties, the new musical style
was psychedelia, and the subculture that was
creating its values was the Hippies.
But some Hippies went a step further than
the pop subcultures that came before them,
and believed that their values are good not
only for them, but for the rest of humanity
as well.
They believed that their values could change
the world, make it better.
By the end of the sixties, however, this dream
was shattered, and some rock musicians tried
to figure out what went wrong.
One of these musicians was David Bowie.
Bowie begins his journey with his second album,
Space Oddity, released in 1969.
Several tracks on the album dramatize the
failings of the Hippie culture, and the flimsiness
of the philosophical grounds that its ideals
stood on.
The counter-culture of the sixties was flailing,
and Bowie realized that a new direction is
needed.
In his next album, The Man Who Sold the World,
released in 1970, he starts to blaze his own
path.
The album is more individualistic in nature,
and reveals influences that weren't typical
of the Hippies.
The biggest obvious influence is Nietzsche.
In the track 'She Shook Me Cold', Bowie assumes
the character of a young lad who was a regular
Don Juan, treating women as objects of conquest,
and sex as an act of conquering.
But then, he met a woman who showed him that
sex can be something more.
So, first of all, this sexual encounter takes
place on a hill, and the whole thing feels
mystical.
This is in line with the entire album: it
aspires to get away from the daily life of
the modern urban world, and find the mystical
realms hidden within it.
His sexual partner is a fiendish being, not
necessarily human, and she awakens something
in him.
What is it?
Well, it is his "dormant will".
That wouldn't mean much, if the song wasn't
part of an album steeped in Nietzschean concepts.
But since it is, we can surmise that what
has been awoken is his Will to Power, which
makes him want to experience a greater life
than he has been leading.
The boy, however, doesn't realize that what
gave him this experience was something inside
him.
He thinks that it is the woman who was responsible
for it.
And so, he ends the song by telling us that
he is obsessed with finding her again.
This is typical of Bowie's early records.
He often assumes a character that doesn't
really understand what is happening to him.
We, the listeners, are supposed to read between
the lines, to get the real message.
Here, we are supposed to understand that what
gave him that peak was not the woman, but
his own Will to Power that has been awoken.
However, the woman is also important, and
this is one of the main differences between
Bowie and Nietzsche.
There are many similarities between the two
men.
Like Nietzsche, Bowie describes reality as
a stream of impermanence, where there is no
stable form and land, where any structure
is just a ripple that will eventually dissolve
back into the stream.
Like Nietzsche, he tries to find a way to
live a heroic life within this ever-changing
reality.
And like Nietzsche, his solution is repeated
self-creation.
But while for Nietzsche this was a totally
individualistic way of life, where the self
is finding the powers within itself to surpass
itself, for Bowie this is always done with
outside help.
You can't transcend your own world without
someone from another world providing you with
the means to do so.
There is always a crack in the sky, and a
hand that comes down through it to pull you
out of your world.
Bowie was a child of pop culture, where the
thinking is communal, and Nietzsche's total
self-sufficiency could no longer compute.
To say it differently, while Nietzsche regards
the human individual as an independent entity,
which can exist without others, Bowie starts
from the notion that a human is always part
of society.
But within this frame, Bowie wanted to go
his own way, to set his own rules.
In the title track, 'The Man Who Sold the
World', he basically presents his aspiration,
to live an entire life without conforming
to society, without selling out to the world.
The sixties generation thought that this is
impossible, that you only have a few short
years to express yourself and live to the
ultimate high, before you either die or conform
and live a boring bourgeois life.
Bowie wanted to show that it is possible to
live an entire life that way.
And he was searching for the method to do
so.
In the opening track, 'Width of a Circle',
we go straight into the drama of his psyche.
It's an epic piece, eight minutes long, and
is one of the most indicative of Bowie's thought
in that period.
The track begins, like several other tracks
from that period, with the protagonist stuck
in a meaningless existence.
He is blaming "the master" for his condition,
by which Bowie is probably telling us that
he was a radical leftist who thought that
the only way to change his condition would
be to change the system.
This type of thinking was very prevalent within
the counter-culture, and Bowie despised it.
He is telling us that this left him in an
existence where he could only repeat what
has been done many times before, and there
was no path to actual happiness.
But then, he has a moment where he gets to
see himself for what he really is, and realizes
that this idleness has turned him into a monster.
This shakes him into action, into wanting
to find a way to break out of his world and
find a new kind of existence.
As we can see, our protagonist sets about
to destroy his old self.
We get a hint that he had a homosexual encounter,
which back then was considered one way of
self-destruction.
By engaging in what was seen as a sinful and
unnatural form of sexual activity, you destroy
the values you grew up on.
Once again, we see that you need someone else
to help you in the process.
And it works: the singer tells us that God
did indeed take his logic for a ride, to places
where it's never been before.
A couple of years later, when Bowie performed
the song on stage, as he reached this part
he would do a mime routine, in which we see
him banging himself against an imaginary wall.
It is the wall surrounding his old worldview,
the one that he wants to break out of.
Finally, he finds a crack in it, and he steps
out.
Immediately, he starts to fly, transcending
to the heavens.
It is a moment of self-surpassing, the most
joyous moment according to Nietzsche, and
according to Bowie as well.
The music soars along with him, as he experiences
the ultimate high.
But then, the music changes again.
Turns out he is not alone.
He told us, as we recall, that God had taken
him for a ride, and now we see that he meant
it literally.
There is a divinity there with him, carrying
him to the heavens.
Actually, we are beginning to realize that
they are in a midst of a homosexual intercourse.
But our hero is beginning to feel that something
is wrong about his partner.
His reason is telling him to break away, to
go back to his old world, but the experience
is too strong, and it compels him to continue.
Now it is obvious that there is something
wrong, and that this isn't God.
His reason is still screaming at him to go
back, but he enjoys it so much that he wants
more and more.
His sexual partner is revealed as a demon,
with a serpent's body.
He knows that he must break away, but he is
too committed, and he lets the demon carry
him away to their final destination.
And so the story ends, with our hero stuck
in hell, as Satan's plaything.
Again, this is typical of Bowie's records
of the period.
He would often tell a story about someone
who finds a new thing, which changes his life
and brings him joy.
But then that thing becomes bad, and brings
him misery.
He should let go, but he is so committed to
it that he can't, and it drags him to hell.
What was initially the thing that liberated
him, becomes the thing that enslaves him.
We see the similarities with Nietzsche.
He too warned that after you create something
it eventually becomes your enemy, that the
new self will also need to be surpassed.
But Bowie adds a warning that you might become
too attached to your creation, and will be
unable to fight against it.
Why does this happen?
Because western thought teaches us that truth
and joy are interconnected, and that truth
is eternal.
So when someone finds something that is more
joyful than anything that they ever experience,
they are driven to believe that they found
the eternal truth, which will bring them joy
forever.
Thus, they hang on to it, even when it is
no longer joyful.
This is what happened to many Hippies, who
couldn't let go of their culture even when
it turned sour.
But Bowie here introduces the Nietzschean
outlook into the rock world, and prepares
to give it a new set of values.
Bowie's next album was 1971's Hunky Dory,
in which he continues to develop these insights,
but connects them to contemporary pop culture.
He was now ready to implement those insights,
to actually live out Nietzsche's way of the
creating one.
And he started doing so in 1972, with an album
called The Rise and Fall of Ziggy Stardust
and the Spiders from Mars.
The album is made of eleven tracks, which
loosely form a narrative.
We start, as usual, with a feeling of meaninglessness
and alienation, of living in a world with
no future prospects, seeking love but not
knowing how to find it.
Then, an alien from another world arrives,
and promises to elevate us through the power
of rock'n'roll, into an existence full of
meaning and love.
The formerly alienated kids finally find something
that they can identify with, a truth that
they can coalesce around, a joyful identity
by which they surpass their old identity.
And so, they form a subculture around the
alien Ziggy Stardust, a subculture in which
they find unity and love, a subculture in
which they can express themselves and be creative.
It is wonderful for a while, but then, the
very elements that once brought them joy become
corrupted, the joy is gone, and eventually
the subculture disintegrates.
At the end of the album, we find ourselves
back in an aimless existence.
But it doesn't end there, because then, another
alien comes to offer us a hand, and pull us
to the heavens.
And so rock'n'roll lives on.
Bowie is basically reacting to the downfall
of the sixties counter-culture.
In the early seventies, this led to desperation,
and a sense of failure.
But Bowie tells us that the Hippies didn't
fail.
They simply made the mistake of believing
that the joy of psychedelic music expressed
an eternal truth, when in fact psychedelia
was just the thing that allowed for creation
and self-surpassing at that specific historical
moment.
Once the moment was over, it was time to move
on to the next joyful experience.
If the Hippies were thinking in a Nietzschean
manner, they would have realized it, but they
were still thinking along traditional lines.
To be the man who sold the world, Bowie had
to think differently.
The real novelty of the album was that Bowie
made its plot happen in real life as well.
By appropriating elements of cultures that
were alien to mainstream Western culture,
he assumed the character of the alien Ziggy
Stardust, and started touring across Britain.
And, lo and behold, it worked.
The kids reacted just like the album predicted,
and Ziggy became a pop sensation, a voice
to alienated youth.
A subculture formed around him, and it all
went according to the blueprint laid in the
first half of the album.
But then, after experiencing Ziggy's rise,
Bowie had no intentions of going through his
fall.
As a true Nietzschean, he took control over
his transformations.
At the height of Ziggy's fame, when he felt
like things are beginning to get corrupted,
he simply killed him off.
At the end of the first part of Thus Spake
Zarathustra, Zarathustra gathers his disciples,
and tells them:
I now go alone, my disciples!
Ye also now go away, and alone!
So will I have it.
Verily, I advise you: depart from me, and
guard yourselves against Zarathustra!
And better still: be ashamed of him!
Perhaps he hath deceived you.
Now do I bid you lose me and find yourselves;
and only when ye have all denied me, will
I return unto you.
This is obviously paraphrasing Jesus, in his
last days.
Except Zarathustra isn't reprimanding his
followers for denying him, but rather asks
of them to.
Basically, he is telling them that they have
completed the camel stage, taking from him
what he had to give them, and now they should
go their own way and complete their spiritual
development.
Only when they are original creators, will
he return to them as an equal, and then they
can have a real exchange.
So for Nietzsche, the act of self-creation
is always an individual thing, and a community
is just a gathering of different individuals.
For Bowie it is different.
The self-creation is a communal thing, and
is creating a shared identity.
But when it is no longer a good identity,
the members of the community should deny it,
and part ways to find a new communal identity.
If you realize that the shared identity has
become corrupted, the best thing to do is
to break up the band.
Many Ziggy fans felt betrayed when Bowie retired
him, but Bowie was operating on another set
of rules.
From there, he carried on according to the
same blueprint.
Every year he would put out an album, which
would open with a track describing his alienation
to the identity that he had in the previous
album.
The subsequent tracks would then overcome
this alienation by presenting a new identity,
which would be created by appropriating from
alien cultures.
During his journey, he went through all of
the pitfalls that Nietzsche warned us of,
experiencing loneliness, moments of doubt,
and some serious battles with inner demons.
On the way, he also had to work out the moral
problems that result from this ethics of constant
self-surpassing.
But he found solutions to everything, and
by the end of the seventies, he was able to
declare his victory.
It's hard for us today to appreciate just
how revolutionary Bowie was.
Since pretty much all of pop music from the
late seventies on took place under his shadow,
what he did seems natural to us.
Before Bowie, a singer was supposed to have
one image and one style, and stick to it.
After Bowie, every singer was expected to
periodically change, and update their image
and style.
Eventually, it lost its heroic nature.
Whereas Bowie taught us that every new identity
has to be completely original, mixing together
alien elements to go into places where no
one has gone before, those who followed in
his footsteps were often not that daring.
So it doesn't seem that exciting and dangerous
anymore.
Nevertheless, Bowie updated the Nietzschean
idea of self-surpassing and brought it into
pop, and in so doing, made it a lot more prevalent
in our culture.
In a fast-changing world like our world, it
is hard to remain connected to the spirit
of the time, but those who have internalized
his ethics of regeneration have managed to
do so.
Bowie showed us that you can live an entire
life of remaining true to yourself, never
selling out to the system, and still be successful.
It is an amazing story of triumph, and in
the future I am going to tell it here.
To the artists among us, Bowie showed how
to remain relevant and effective.
By appropriating elements from other cultures,
and mixing them with elements of his culture,
he would liberate something that his culture
was hitherto unable to express.
There were always those who identified with
the new thing that he created, and they formed
a new shared identity, a new culture.
And this is how your identity remains vital,
your art remains vital, and your spirit remains
vital.
If you are one who wishes to create, you should
load your spirit with this lesson.
