Abstract
Scholars since World War II have distinguished National Socialism from Enlightenment by pointing to Nazi recourse to mythic structures in construction of its ideology,l and liberal opposition to Nazism has long been based on consequent rejection of myth. The attempt to separate Enlightenment from Nazism based on myth dates back to 1926, when Thomas Mann attacked theory of myth developed by budding philosopher, Alfred Baeumler, and accused him of promoting a Nazi agenda by defending the great Return to mystic-historical-romantic womb of mother.2 Against such a reactionary return to romanticism and mysticism, Mann defends idealism and humanism and seeks victory of Apollinian rules and concepts over mythic forces, writing that instead of praying to myth, one would do better today by helping one's people to win such victories.3 Helmut Koopmann argues that Mann's anti-fascist, Enlightenment position can be differentiated from Baeumler's fascist one because Mann supports victory of father principle while Baeumler sought a regression back toward cult of mother.4 But as Hubert
Highlights
Scholars since World War II have distinguished National Socialism from the Enlightenment by pointing to the Nazi recourse to mythic structures in the construction of its ideology, 1 and liberal opposition to Nazism has long been based on the consequent rejection of myth
The attempt to separate the Enlightenment from Nazism based on myth dates back to 1926, when Thomas Mann attacked the theory of myth developed by the budding philosopher, Alfred Baeumler, and accused him of promoting a Nazi agenda by defending the "the great Return to the mystic-historical-romantic womb of the mother."[2] Against such a reactionary return to romanticism and mysticism, Mann defends idealism and humanism and seeks the victory of Apollinian rules and concepts over mythic forces, writing that "instead of praying to the myth, one would do better today by helping one's people to win such victories."[3]
Helmut Koopmann argues that Mann's anti-fascist, Enlightenment position can be differentiated from Baeumler's fascist one because Mann supports the victory of the father principle while Baeumler sought a regression back toward the cult of the mother.[4]
Summary
Scholars since World War II have distinguished National Socialism from the Enlightenment by pointing to the Nazi recourse to mythic structures in the construction of its ideology, 1 and liberal opposition to Nazism has long been based on the consequent rejection of myth. Baeumler does not see any connection between form and ecstatic moments in the subject because these moments remain confined to a passive inner process, which does not refer to anything outside of itself This view opposes Nietzsche's idea that it is precisely such an inner process that gives rise to form as the recapitulation of contradictions, which extend from the experience of the subject into the "heart of the world."[30] Baeumler sees this Dionysian-mimetic understanding of form as purely subjective, and divorced from reality, and seeks to ground tragedy and myth in a "material" reality of cultic ritual. He replaces Nietzsche's aesthetic explanation oftragedy with a cultic one. The tragedy is a myth only to the extent that the ritual speaks through it, grounding the tragedy in the sacred realm of ritual and turning it into myth
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
