悲剧的诞生 The birth of Tragedy
《悲剧的诞生》缪郎山1965年
根据Alf red Baeumler 编的“尼采全集”卷一译出，北京中国人民大学1979年版.
The Birth of Tragedy
Attempt at a Self-Criticism(1886)
First publication, 1872:The Birth of Tragedy out of the Spirit of
Second Edition, 1878: (some textual changes).
Third edition, 1886: &Attempt at a Self-Criticism& added and a new
title, The Birth of Tragedy Or: Hellenism And Pessimism.
献给理查．瓦格纳
　　为了，鉴于我们审美大众的特殊性质，我对集中在这篇论文里的思想会引起的种种可能的怀疑、兴奋和误解，要敬而远之；而且，为了我能够怀着同样静观的快感――这种快感像我兴高采烈的时光之化石似的在每一页上都留下标志――来写此文的前言；因此，我设想您，我最敬爱的朋友，接受这篇论文的那一刹间；您，也许是在冬雪的黄昏散步之后，在书名页上见到那被幽囚的普罗密修斯，读到我的名字，便立刻相信；无论此文的内容是甚么，作者总有一些重要而动人的话要说，况且他把他的一切感想对您诉说，好象是当面倾谈那样，他也只能写下适合于当面倾谈的话。于此，您将记得，当您酝酿您那篇辉煌的贝多芬纪念文时，也就是说，在战争爆发时的恐怖和激昂情绪中，我同时正专心致力这篇论文。但是，如果有人以为我的专心是审美的陶醉而非爱国的热情，是怡情的游戏而非英勇的挚诚，那就错了；这种读者，在认真地读完这篇论文之后，将会愕然发现；我们要讨论的是多么重要的德国问题，我们把这问题恰好正确地放在德国的希望之中心地位。然而，或许这种读者见到一个审美问题被这样严肃地处理，毕竟会觉得欠妥，尤其是如果他们认为艺术不过是一种娱乐的闲事，不过是系在“生活的庄严”上可有可无的风铃；仿佛无人能体会到所谓“生活的庄严”之对立面有什么意义。我应该告诉诚恳的读者，我相信艺术乃是人类所了解的人生底最高使命及其正确的超脱活动，现在我将这篇论文摘给他们――我在这条路上的崇高的战友们。
一八七一年岁末．于巴塞尔。
Preface to Richard Wagner(1871)
To keep at a distance all the possible scruples, excitements,
and misunderstandings that the thoughts united in this essay
will occasion, in view of the peculiar character of our aesthetic
public, and to be able to write these introductory remarks,
too, with the same contemplative delight whose reflection--the
distillation of good and elevating hours--is evident on every
page, I picture the moment when you, my highly respected friend,
will receive this essay. Perhaps after an evening walk in the
winter snow, you will behold Prometheus unbound on the title
page, read my name, and be convinced at once that, whatever
this essay should contain, the author certainly has something
serio also that, as he hatched these ideas,
he was communicating with you as if you were present, and hence
could write down only what was in keeping with that presence.
You will recall that it was during the same period when your
splendid Festschrift on Beethoven came into being,
amid the terrors and sublimities of the war that had just broken
out, that I collected myself for these reflections. Yet anyone
would be mistaken if he associated my reflections with the contrast
between patriotic excitement and aesthetic enthusiasm, of courageous
seriousness and a cheerful game: if he really read this essay,
it would dawn on him, to his surprise, what a seriously German
problem is faced here and placed right in the center of German
hopes, as a vortex and turning point. But perhaps such readers
will find it offensive that an aesthetic problem should be taken
so seriously--assuming they are unable to consider art more
than a pleasant sideline, a readily dispensable tinkling of
bells that accompanies the &seriousness of life,& just as if
nobody knew what was involved in such a contrast with the &seriousness
of life.& Let such &serious& readers learn something from the
fact that I am convinced that art represents the highest task
and the truly metaphysical activity of this life, in the sense
of that man to whom, as my sublime predecessor on this path,
I wish to dedicate this essay.Basel, end of the
假如我们不仅达到逻辑的判断，而且达到直觉的直接确定，认为艺术的不断发展，与梦神阿波罗和酒神狄奥尼索斯这两类型有关，正如生育有赖于雌雄两性，在持续的斗争中，只是间或和解；那么，我们对于美学将大有贡献。这两个名词，我们假借自古希腊人，它们使得明敏的心灵能领悟到希腊艺术观的深奥的秘仪，当然不是在概念上，而是从他们的极其明确的神象上从阿波罗和狄奥尼索斯这两个希腊艺术神，我们认识到，古希腊世界，阿波罗的雕刻艺术和狄奥尼索斯的非造型的音乐艺术之间，就其起源和目的来说，形成一种强烈的对照，这两种如此不同的倾向彼此并行，但多半是公开决裂。互相刺激而获得不断的新生，在斗争中使得这种矛盾永久存在，而“艺术”这个共同名词不过是表面上为它们架桥梁；直到最后，凭借希腊“意志”的玄妙奇迹，这两者又结合起来，终于产生既是狄奥尼索斯型又是阿波罗型的阿提刻悲剧艺术作品。
Much will have been gained for
aesthetics once we have succeeded in apprehending directly--rather
than merely ascertaining--that art owes its continuous
evolution to the Apollinian- Dionysian duality, even as the
propagation of the species depends on the duality of the sexes,
their constant conflicts and periodic acts of reconciliation.
I have borrowed my adjectives from the Greeks, who developed
their mystical doctrines of art through plausible embodiments,
not through purely conceptual means. It is by those two art
sponsoring deities, Apollo and Dionysus, that we are made to
recognize the tremendous split, as regards both origins and
objectives, between the plastic, Apollinian arts and the nonvisual
art of music inspired by Dionysus. The two creative tendencies
developed alongside one another, usually in fierce opposition,
each by its taunts forcing the other to more energetic production,
both perpetuating in a discordant concord that agon which the
term art but feebly denominates: until at last, by
the thaumaturgy of an Hellenic act of will, the pair accepted
the yoke of marriage and, in this condition, begot Attic tragedy,
which exhibits the salient features of both parents.
为了更深体会这两种倾向，让我们首先把它们看作两个分歧的艺术境界，梦境与醉境，这两种生理现象显出一种对照，类似阿波罗型与狄奥尼索斯型的对照。鲁克勒提乌斯（Luorotius）曾设想：庄严的神象，首先是在梦中对人类的心灵显现的，伟大的雕刻家也是在梦中见到这些超人灵物的辉煌形体。假如你向这位古希腊诗人询问诗的创作之秘密，他同样会提出梦境，正象亨斯．萨克斯（HansSachs）在善歌者（Meistersinger）中所说的那样，对你指教：
　　朋友呵，这正是诗人的责任；
　　去阐明和记下自己的梦境。
　　信我吧，人间最真实的幻影
　　往往是在梦中对人们显现；
　　所有的诗艺和所有的诗情
　　不过是对现实之梦的说明。(尼采在本文中以美神阿波罗的属性代表造型艺术的静美，以酒神狄奥尼索斯的书信代表音乐艺术的兴奋，他使用“阿波罗”和“狄奥尼索斯”这两个名词甚多，为了便于理解，我把前者简译为“梦神”或“梦境”，后者为“酒神”或“醉境”。)
To reach a closer understanding
of both these tendencies, let us begin by viewing them as the
separate art realms of dream and intoxication,
two physiological phenomena standing toward one another in much
the same relationship as the Apollinian and Dionysian. It was
in a dream, according to Lucretius, that the marvelous gods
and goddesses first presented themselves to the minds of men.
That great sculptor, Phidias, beheld in a dream the entrancing
bodies of more than human beings, and likewise, if anyone had
asked the Greek poets about the mystery of poetic creation,
they too would have referred him to dreams and instructed him
much as Hans Sachs instructs us in Die Meistersinger:
The poet's task is this, my friend,
to read his dreams and comprehend.
The truest human fancy seems
to be revealed to us in dreams:
all poems and versification
are but true dreams' interpretation.
　　梦境的美丽的假象，――在梦的创作方面，人人都是美满的艺术家，――是一切造型艺术的先决条件，不仅如此，甚且是诗的主要成份，我们在下文将会论及。在梦里，我们尝到直接领会形象的乐趣，所有梦中形象都对我们倾谈，无一是不重要，无一是多余的。但是，即使梦境的现实达到最高度时，我们仍然感到梦的若明若灭的假象，至少我的经验是如此；至于这假象的频繁及其常态，我可以征引许多例子以及诗人的话作证。爱好哲理的人，甚至有一种预感；在我们生息于其间的客观现实之下，隐藏着另一种绝对不同的现实，它也是一种假象。叔本华就认为：有人间或把人类和事物看作仅仅是幻影和梦景，这种天才就是哲学才能的标志。所以，美感敏锐的人对梦境现实的关系，正如哲学家对生活现实的关系那样；他是一个精细而乐意的观照者，因为他从这些画景上体会到人生的意义，他凭借梦中的经历来锻炼自己对待人生。这不仅是他亲自体验到了然于心的，愉快亲切的画景而已，而且一切严肃的，悲哀的，愁闷的，忧郁的情绪，突然的障碍，命运的揶揄，不安的期待，总之，人生的整部“神曲”及其“地狱篇”，都掠过他眼前，不是仅仅象镜花水月，因为他就在这些情景中生活着，苦恼着，然而仍不免有昙花一现的假象之感。也许，不少人会象我那样记得，他们在梦境的危难和恐怖中，有时会自策自励而往往成功地喊道：“是梦吧，我索性梦下去呵！”我也曾听说有人能够一连三四个晚上继续经历同一个梦的前因后果：这些事实提供了明证，可见我们的心灵深处，我们的日常生活的底层，转化为梦境，我们在梦中体会到深深的欢欣和愉快的必然。
　　古希腊人把这种梦中经验的愉快的必然，体现在阿波罗神的身上，因为阿波罗是一切造型能力之神，同时也是预言之神。阿波罗，就字源来说，意即“灿烂的神”，乃是光明之神，掌管我们内心幻象世界的美丽假象。这是更高的真理，是与不可捉摸的日常生活截然不同的美满境界，是对自然在睡梦中治病救人的作用的深刻认识同时也就是预言能力乃至一切艺术的象征，由于这点，生活才有意义，才值得留恋。然而，要知道，有一条微妙的界线，是梦景所不能超越的，否则就会产生病理作用，我们会把假象误认为平凡的现实，――我们在想象阿波罗的形象时不可忽略这点；这位雕塑之神表现出适度的自制，并无粗野的激情，而有智慧的静穆。他的目光必须“光如旭日”，才合乎他的来源；即使当他勃然震怒或神色沮丧时，他的美貌也不失为圣洁的。所以，在某种意义上，我们不妨把叔本华论及藏在
“幻”（Maja）的幛幔中的人的话应用于阿波罗身上：“正如在无边无涯、洪涛起伏、澎湃怒吼的海洋，舟子坐在船上，托身于一叶扁舟；同样，在这痛苦的世界里；孤独的人也只好安心静座，信赖个性原则（Prinoipiumindividuationis）以支持”（见意志及表象的世界第一卷）。其实，我们可以说，这种信赖自我和安心静坐的精神在梦神阿波罗身上获得最崇高的表现；我们也可以说，梦神自己就是个性原则的尊严的神象，他的表情和神色都对我们说明了“假象”的一切愉快和智慧，以及它的美。
The fair illusion of the dream
sphere, in the production of which every man proves himself
an accomplished artist, is a precondition not only of all plastic
art, but even, as we shall see presently, of a wide range of
poetry. Here we enjoy an immediate apprehension of form, all
shapes speak to us directly, nothing seems indifferent or redundant.
Despite the high intensity with which these dream realities
exist for us, we still have a residual sensation that they are
at least such has been my experience-- and the frequency,
not to say normality, of the experience is borne out in many
passages of the poets. Men of philosophical disposition are
known for their constant premonition that our everyday reality,
too, is an illusion, hiding another, totally different kind
of reality. It was Schopenhauer who considered the ability to
view at certain times all men and things as mere phantoms or
dream images to be the true mark of philosophic talent. The
person who is responsive to the stimuli of art behaves toward
the reality of dream much the way the philosopher behaves toward
the reality of existence: he observes exactly and enjoys his
observations, for it is by these images that he interprets life,
by these processes that he rehearses it. Nor is it by pleasant
images only that such plausible connections are made: the whole
divine comedy of life, including its somber aspects, its sudden
balkings, impish accidents, anxious expectations, moves past
him, not quite like a shadow play--for it is he himself, after
all, who lives and suffers through these scenes--yet never without
giving a fleeti and I imagine that many
persons have reassured themselves amidst the perils of dream
by calling out, &It is a dream! I want it to go on.& I have
even heard of people spinning out the causality of one and the
same dream over three or more successive nights. All these facts
clearly bear witness that our innermost being, the common substratum
of humanity, experiences dreams with deep delight and a sense
of real necessity. This deep and happy sense of the necessity
of dream experiences was expressed by the Greeks in the image
of Apollo. Apollo is at once the god of all plastic powers and
the soothsaying god. He who is etymologically the &lucent& one,
the god of light, reigns also over the fair illusion of our
inner world of fantasy. The perfection of these conditions in
contrast to our imperfectly understood waking reality, as well
as our profound awareness of nature's healing powers during
the interval of sleep and dream, furnishes a symbolic analogue
to the soothsaying faculty and quite generally to the arts,
which make life possible and worth living. But the image of
Apollo must incorporate that thin line which the dream image
may not cross, under penalty of becoming pathological, of imposing
itself on us as crass reality: a discreet limitation, a freedom
from all extravagant urges, the sapient tranquillity of the
plastic god. His eye must be sunlike, in keeping with his origin.
Even at those moments when he is angry and ill-tempered there
lies upon him the consecration of fair illusion. In an eccentric
way one might say of Apollo what Schopenhauer says, in the first
part of The World as Will and Idea, of man caught in
the veil of Maya: &Even as on an immense, raging sea, assailed
by huge wave crests, a man sits in a little rowboat trusting
his frail craft, so, amidst the furious torments of this world,
the individual sits tranquilly, supported by the principium
individuationis and relying on it.& One might say that
the unshakable confidence in that principle has received its
most magnificent expression in Apollo, and that Apollo himself
may be regarded as the marvelous divine image of the principium
individuationis, whose looks and gestures radiate the full
delight, wisdom, and beauty of &illusion.&
　　叔本华在这篇文章中又给我们描写，当一个人对认识现实的方式突然感到惶惑，当他所根据的定理在任何情况下都似乎遇到例外时，他会感到多么可怕的惶恐。假如，在这惶恐以外，还加上当个性原则崩溃时，从人底心灵深处，甚至从性灵里，升起的这种狂喜的陶醉；那末，我们便可以洞见酒神狄奥尼索斯的本性，把它比拟为醉境也许最为贴切。或是在醇酒的影响下原始人和原始民族高唱颂歌时，或是在春光渐近万物欣然向荣的季候，酒神的激情便苏醒了；当激情高涨时，主观的一切都化入混然忘我之境。所以，在德意志的中世纪，常常有积聚成群的歌队巡游各地，载歌载舞，这也是由于这种酒神冲动。在圣约翰节和圣维托斯节的歌舞者中，我们再见到古希腊酒神节歌队的面影，他们的前期历史溯源于小亚细亚，远至巴比伦和崇奉秘仪的萨刻亚人（SakaAen）。有些人，因为缺乏经验，或者思想迟钝，自以为心灵健康，带着讥讽或怜悯说这种现象是“民间病态”，避之唯恐不及；但是这些可怜虫当然料想不到，他们的所谓“心灵健康”，同酒神歌队的热烈的生机洋溢相比，显得多么惨白如幽灵！
In the same context Schopenhauer
has described for us the tremendous awe which seizes man when
he suddenly begins to doubt the cognitive modes of experience,
in other words, when in a given instance the law of causation
seems to suspend itself. If we add to this awe the glorious
transport which arises in man, even from the very depths of
nature, at the shattering of the principium individuationis,
then we are in a position to apprehend the essence of Dionysian
rapture, whose closest analogy is furnished by physical intoxication.
Dionysian stirrings arise either through the influence of those
narcotic potions of which all primitive races speak in their
hymns, or through the powerful approach of spring, which penetrates
with joy the whole frame of nature. So stirred, the individual
forgets himself completely. It is the same Dionysian power which
in medieval Germany drove ever increasing crowds of people singing
and dancing we recognize in these St. John's
and St. Vitus' dancers the Bacchic choruses of the Greeks, who
had their precursors in Asia Minor and as far back as Babylon
and the orgiastic Sacaea. There are people who, either from
lack of experience or out of sheer stupidity, turn away from
such phenomena, and, strong in the sense of their own sanity,
label them either mockingly or pityingly &endemic diseases.&
These benighted souls have no idea how cadaverous and ghostly
their &sanity& appears as the intense throng of Dionysian revelers
sweeps past them.
　　在酒神的魔力下，不但人与人之间的团结再次得以巩固，甚至那被疏远、被敌视、被屈服的大自然也再次庆贺她与她的浪子人类言归于好。大地慷慨地献出礼贡，猛兽和平地从危崖荒漠走来，酒神的战车装饰着百卉花环，虎豹在他的轭下驱驰。你试把贝多芬的“快乐之颂”绘成图画，你试用想象力去凝想那些惊惶失措伏地膜拜的芸芸众生。你便能体会到酒神的魔力了。此时，奴隶也是自由人；此时，专横的礼教，和“可耻的习俗”，在人与人之间树立的顽强敌对的藩篱，蓦然被推倒；此时，在世界大同的福音中，人不但感到自己与邻人团结了，和解了，融洽了，而且是万众一心；仿佛“幻”的幛幔刹时间被撕破，不过在神秘的“太一”面前还是残叶似的飘零。人在载歌载舞中，感到自己是更高社团的一员；他陶然忘步，混然忘言；他行将翩跹起舞，凌空飞去！他的姿态就传出一种魅力。正如现在走兽也能作人语，正如现在大地流出乳液与蜜浆，同样从他心灵深处发出了超自然的声音。
Not only does the bond between
man and man come to be forged once more by the magic of the
Dionysian rite, but nature itself, long alienated or subjugated,
rises again to celebrate the reconciliation with her prodigal
son, man. The earth offers its gifts voluntarily, and the savage
beasts of mountain and desert approach in peace. The chariot
of Dionysus is bedecked with
and tigers stride beneath his yoke. If one were to convert Beethoven's
&Paean to Joy& into a painting, and refuse to curb the imagination
when that multitude prostrates itself reverently in the dust,
one might form some apprehension of Dionysian ritual. Now the
all the rigid, hostile walls which
either necessity or despotism has erected between men are shattered.
Now that the gospel of universal harmony is sounded, each individual
becomes not only reconciled to his fellow but actually at one
with him--as though the veil of Maya had been torn apart and
there remained only shreds floating before the vision of mystical
Oneness. Man now expresses himself through song and dance as
the member o he has forgotten how to walk,
how to speak, and is on the brink of taking wing as he dances.
Each of his gestures
through him sounds
a supernatural power, the same power which makes the animals
speak and the earth render up milk and honey.
他觉得自己是神灵，他陶然神往，飘然踯躅，宛若他在梦中所见的独往独来的神物。他已经不是一个艺术家，而俨然是一件艺术品；在陶醉的战栗下，一切自然的艺术才能都显露出来，达到了“太一”的最高度狂欢的酣畅。人，这种最高尚的尘土，最贵重的白石，就在这一刹间被捏制，被雕琢；应和着这位宇宙艺术家酒神的斧凿声，人们发出尼琉息斯（Eleusis）秘仪的呐喊：“苍生呵，你们颓然拜倒了吗？世界呵，你能洞察你的创造者吗？”①
　　①酒神祭是古希腊民间信仰的一种秘仪，在神话传说上，它与厄琉息斯“地母祭”的秘仪有密切关系，两者都与古希腊农业生产有关。
He feels himself to be godlike
and strides with the same elation and ecstasy as the gods he
has seen in his dreams. No longer the artist, he has
himself become a work of art: the productive power
of the whole universe is now manifest in his transport, to the
glorious satisfaction of the primordial One. The finest clay,
the most precious marble--man--is here kneaded and hewn, and
the chisel blows of the Dionysian world artist are accompanied
by the cry of the Eleusinian mystagogues: &Do you fall on your
knees, multitudes, do you divine your creator?&
　　直到现在，我们曾把梦境和它的对立面醉境看作两种发乎自然，并无人工参与的艺术创造力，在这些力量中，发乎自然的艺术冲动，获得最方便最直接的满足：一方面是梦境的绘画境界，它的美满是不依赖个人的知识高超和艺术修养的；号一方面是醉境的现实，它也是绝不尊重个人能力，甚或竭力把个性摧毁，然后通过一种神秘的万类统一感来救济他。对这两种自然的、直接的艺术境界而言，每个艺术家都是“摹仿者”，换句话说，他或是梦神式的梦境艺术家，或是酒神式的醉境艺术家，或者最后既是梦境的又是醉境的艺术家，例如希腊悲剧作家；就悲剧家而言，我们不妨设想，他初时沈湎在酒神的醉境和神秘的忘我之境，孑然一身，离开了狂歌纵饮的群伍；然后，由于梦神的梦境的感召，他自己的境界，也就是说，他与宇宙根源的统一，立刻在他眼前显现为一幅象征的梦景图画。
So far we have examined the Apollinian
and Dionysian states as the product of formative forces arising
directly from nature without the mediation of the human artist.
At this stage artistic urges are satisfied directly, on the
one hand through the imagery of dreams, whose perfection is
quite independent of the intellectual rank, the artistic development
on the other hand, through an ecstatic reality
which once again takes no account of the individual and may
even destroy him, or else redeem him through a mystical experience
of the collective. In relation to these immediate creative conditions
of nature every artist must appear as &imitator,& either as
the Apollinian dream artist or the Dionysian ecstatic artist,
or, finally (as in Greek tragedy, for example) as dream and
ecstatic artist in one. We might picture to ourselves how the
last of these, in a state of Dionysian intoxication and mystical
self-abrogation, wandering apart from the reveling throng, sinks
upon the ground, and how there is then revealed to him his own
condition--complete oneness with the essence of the universe--in
a dream similitude.
　　一般性的前提和对照既已说明，现在让我们进而研究古希腊人，看看发乎自然的艺术冲动在希腊人中间发展到何等高度；因此，我们便有可能更深入地了解和估计希腊艺术家对其原型的关系，亦即亚里士多德所谓“摹仿自然”。虽则古希腊人有不少写梦作品和记梦奇谈，我们讨论他们的梦却只能凭猜测，即使不无恰当的论断。试想他们洞烛隐微不爽丝毫的造型眼力，试想他们对色彩的坦率鲜明的喜爱，我们就不禁设想（后世人们应引以为耻）：甚至他们的梦也有线条、轮廓、颜色、布局等等的逻辑关系，也有一种类似最精美的希腊浮雕的连环画景。而且是这样的美满，所以我们颇有理由，――假如可以用比喻来说。――去称做梦的希腊人为荷马，称荷马为做梦的希腊人。这总比现代人在谈及自己的梦时竟敢自比为莎士比亚，有更深远的意义。
Having set down these general premises
and distinctions, we now turn to the Greeks in order to realize
to what degree the formative forces of nature were developed
in them. Such an inquiry will enable us to assess properly the
relation of the Greek artist to his prototypes or, to use Aristotle's
expression, his &imitation of nature.& Of the dreams the Greeks
dreamed it is not possible to speak with any certainty, despite
the extant dream literature and the large number of dream anecdotes.
But considering the incredible accuracy of their eyes, their
keen and unabashed delight in colors, one can hardly be wrong
in assuming that their dreams too showed a strict consequence
of lines and contours, hues and groupings, a progression of
scenes similar to their best bas reliefs. The perfection of
these dream scenes might almost tempt us to consider the dreaming
Greek as a Homer and Homer as a dreaming G which would
be as though the modern man were to compare himself in his dreaming
to Shakespeare.
反之，我们不必凭猜测就可以肯定：醉境中的古希腊人和醉境中的野蛮人之间，当然隔着一道不可逾越的鸿沟。在古代世界所有地方，姑且不谈现代世界，从罗马到巴比伦，我们可以指出到处都有酒神祭式的节会，不过这些类型的节会之于希腊类型的节会，至多是像跳羊怪舞的长胡子萨提儿（这个名称和特征取自山羊）之于酒神而已①。所有这些节会的核心，几乎尽是性欲的过分放纵，它的狂潮淹没了一切家庭生活及其可敬的传统；最粗野的兽性蓦然解放，直至酿成情欲与残暴的猥琐的混合；我往往觉得，这堪称为真正的“妖女的淫药”。然而，有时候，古希腊人对于那些从海陆各方传入希腊的节会的狂热激情，似乎完全有了杜渐防微的对策，只要在这场合梦神阿波罗的威严赫赫的形象升起来，他拿出美杜莎的头颅②便可以慑服任何一种比顽蛮怪诞的酒神节会更为危险的力量。梦神这种威严迫人的风度，就体现在多里斯的艺术上，而永垂不朽。然而，一旦酒神的冲动终于从古希腊人的性灵深处发泄出来，拓开一条去路，两者的对抗就更加困难，甚或是不可能；那时候，狄尔斐之神阿波罗的威力减缩了，只好及时地同强敌和解，从他手上夺去那毁灭性的武器。这次和解是希腊宗教崇拜史上最重要的关键；我们无论在何处察看，都可以见到这件大事所引起的变革。两个夙敌已经和解，划清了今后各人应守的界线，有时候还互相馈赠致敬的礼物，但是其间的鸿沟毕竟没有架上桥梁。然而，假如我们见到，在这和平条约压力下，酒神的魔力以甚么样子出现，那末，我们试拿希腊酒神祭秘仪的狂欢纵饮，同巴比伦萨刻亚节那使人退化为虎猿的陋习比较一下，就可以在酒神祭中领悟到基督教的救世节和变容祭的意义了。在佳节良晨，灵性第一次有了艺术性的庆典，个性原则的毁灭第一次成为一种艺术现象；在这场合，情欲与残暴相结合的猥琐的“妖女的淫药”也失效了；唯独酒神信徒的离奇混合的二重性情绪，使我们想到哀极则破涕为欢，乐极则喟叹呻吟的心理现象，正如良药使我们想到毒鸩。这是欢乐极时的惶惑惊呼，或者恨海难填的眷恋哀鸣。在希腊的节会，性灵仿佛露出一种伤感的迹象，为了自己之化整为零掀起一丝喟叹。这些二重性情绪的酒徒的歌声和舞姿，是荷马时代希腊人闻所未闻的新奇事物；尤有甚者，酒神祭音乐激起人们的惶惑和恐惧。虽则我们似乎一向承认音乐是梦境的艺术，但是，严格谈来，这不过是指节奏的律动而言；为了表现梦境境界，便发展了节奏的造型能力。梦境音乐其实是音调方面的多里斯建筑艺术，仅仅是富于暗示的音调，例如竖琴之音。然而，酒神祭音乐，乃至一般音乐的组成成份，例如，音调之惊心动魄，歌韵之急流直泻，和声之绝妙境界，都被慎重地除掉了，被目为非梦境的因素。在酒神颂歌中，人的一切象征能力被激发到最高程度；一些从未体验过的情绪迫不急待地发泻出来――“幻”的幛幔被撕破了，种族灵魂与性灵本身合而为一。现在，性灵的真谛用象征方法表现出来，我们需要一个新的象征世界，肉体的一切象征能力一起出现，不但双唇，脸部，语言富于象征意义，而且丰富多彩的舞姿也使得手足都成为旋律的运动。于是，其它象征能力随之而发生，音乐的象征能力突然暴发为旋律、音质与和声。为了掌握如何把这一切象征能力一起释放，人必须业已达到忘我之境，务求通过这些能力象征地表现出来。所以，酒神祭的信徒，唯有同道中人能够了解。梦神式的希腊人看到这些酒徒，将感到何等惊愕呵！而尤有甚者，惊愕以外加上疑虑，隐约感到这种情绪毕竟是自己所熟识的，不过自己的梦神意识象一幅幛幔似的掩遮着眼前的陶醉境界！
--------萨提儿（Satyr）是希腊神话中一种山林荒野之灵，纵欲好饮，代表原始人的自然冲动，在酒神祭时，古希腊农民庆祝丰收，往往头戴羊角，足穿羊蹄形靴。扮成萨提儿，舞踊作乐。这就是希腊戏剧最原始的雏型。
美杜莎（Medusa），希腊神话中的妖女，其发为蛇蝎，人见之则成为化石，后为阿波罗所杀，用她的头作成武器以慑服敌人。
Yet there is another point about
which we do not have to conjecture at all: I mean the profound
gap separating the Dionysian Greeks from the Dionysian barbarians.
Throughout the range of ancient civilization (leaving the newer
civilizations out of account for the moment) we find evidence
of Dionysian celebrations which stand to the Greek type in much
the same relation as the bearded satyr, whose name and attributes
are derived from the goat, stands to the god Dionysus. The central
concern of such celebrations was, almost universally, a complete
sexual promiscuity overriding every form of established tribal
all the savage urges of the mind were unleashed on those
occasions until they reached that paroxysm of lust and cruelty
which has always struck me as the &witches' cauldron& par
excellence. It would appear that the Greeks were for a
while quite immune from these feverish excesses which must have
reached them by every known land or sea route. What kept Greece
safe was the proud, imposing image of Apollo, who in holding
up the head of the Gorgon to those brutal and grotesque Dionysian
forces subdued them. Doric art has immortalized Apollo's majestic
rejection of all license. But resistance became difficult, even
impossible, as soon as similar urges began to break forth from
the deep substratum of Hellenism itself. Soon the function of
the Delphic god developed into something quite different and
much more limited: all he could hope to accomplish now was to
wrest the destructive weapon, by a timely gesture of pacification,
from his opponent's hand. That act of pacification represents
the most important event in the history of G every
department of life now shows symptoms of a revolutionary change.
The two great antagonists have been reconciled. Each feels obliged
henceforth to keep to his bounds, each will honor the other
by the bestowal of periodic gifts, while the cleavage remains
fundamentally the same. And yet, if we examine what happened
to the Dionysian powers under the pressure of that treaty we
notice a great difference: in the place of the Babylonian Sacaea,
with their throwback of men to the condition of apes and tigers,
we now see entirely new rites celebrated: rites of universal
redemption, of glorious transfiguration. Only now has it become
possible to speak of nature's celebrating an aesthetic
only now has the abrogation of the principium individuationis
become an aesthetic event. That terrible witches' brew concocted
of lust and cruelty has lost all power under the new conditions.
Yet the peculiar blending of emotions in the heart of the Dionysian
reveler--his ambiguity if you will--seems still to hark back
(as the medicinal drug harks back to the deadly poison) to the
days when the infliction of pain was experienced as joy while
a sense of supreme triumph elicited cries of anguish from the
heart. For now in every exuberant joy there is heard an undertone
of terror, or else a wistful lament over an irrecoverable loss.
It is as though in these Greek festivals a sentimental trait
of nature were coming to the fore, as though nature were bemoaning
the fact of her fragmentation, her decomposition into separate
individuals. The chants and gestures of these revelers, so ambiguous
in their motivation, represented an absolute novum
in the world of the Homeric G their Dionysian music, in
especial, spread abroad terror and a deep shudder. It is true:
music had long been familiar to the Greeks as an Apollinian
art, as a regular beat like that of waves lapping the shore,
a plastic rhythm expressly developed for the portrayal of Apollinian
conditions. Apollo's music was a Doric architecture of sound--of
barely hinted sounds such as are proper to the cithara. Those
very elements which characterize Dionysian music and, after
it, music quite generally: the heart shaking power of tone,
the uniform stream of melody, the incomparable resources of
harmony--all those elements had been carefully kept at a distance
as being inconsonant with the Apollinian norm. In the Dionysian
dithyramb man is incited to strain his symbolic faculties to
something quite unheard of is now clamoring to be
heard: the desire to tear asunder the veil of Maya, to sink
back into the origin the desire to express
the very essence of nature symbolically. Thus an entirely new
set of symbols springs into being. First, all the symbols pertaining
to physical features: mouth, face, the spoken word, the dance
movement which coordinates the limbs and bends them to its rhythm.
Then suddenly all the rest of the symbolic forces--music and
rhythm as such, dynamics, harmony--assert themselves with great
energy. In order to comprehend this total emancipation of all
the symbolic powers one must have reached the same measure of
inner freedom those powers themselves
which is to say that the votary of Dionysus could not be understood
except by his own kind. It is not difficult to imagine the awed
surprise with which the Apollinian Greek must have looked on
him. And that surprise would be further increased as the latter
realized, with a shudder, that all this was not so alien to
him after all, that his Apollinian consciousness was but a thin
veil hiding from him the whole Dionysian realm.
　　 想了解这一点，我们就必须把梦神阿波罗文化的艺术大厦一砖一石拆除，直至见到它所凭借的基础。首先，我们发现那些庄严的奥林匹斯神象高据这大厦的山墙上，他们的事迹被刻成光辉四射的浮雕，装饰着腰壁。虽则阿波罗不过是与诸神并列的一介之神，没有优越地位的权利，但我们不应因此感到迷惑。因为整个奥林匹斯神界，总的说来，是从体现在阿波罗神身上的那种冲动诞生的，所以，在这一意义上，阿波罗堪称为神界之父。那么，由于甚么不可思议的要求而产生如此辉煌的奥林匹斯神界呢？
In order to comprehend this we
must take down the elaborate edifice of Apollinian culture stone
by stone until we discover its foundations. At first the eye
is struck by the marvelous shapes of the Olympian gods who stand
upon its pediments, and whose exploits, in shining bas-relief,
adorn its friezes. The fact that among them we find Apollo as
one god among many, making no claim to a privileged position,
should not mislead us. The same drive that found its most complete
representation in Apollo generated the whole Olympian world,
and in this sense we may consider Apollo the father of that
world. But what was the radical need out of which that illustrious
society of Olympian beings sprang?
　　若是有人怀着别种宗教信念去接近奥林匹斯诸神，想从他们那里寻找道德的高尚，神圣的虔洁，超肉体的灵性，慈祥的秋波，他势必怅然失望，立刻掉首而去了。因为这里没有甚么使人想到遁世，灵性，清规戒律的东西：这里我们只听到精力充沛生意盎然的凯旋，这里存在的一切，不论善恶，都被奉若神明。所以，静观的人，站在如此奇妙的生机充溢的景象之前，定必愕然失措，他要抚心自问：这些豪放不羁的人们到底饮了甚么奇方妙药，而能够这样乐生，所以他们不论向哪里看，都见到海伦（Holena）的微笑，而她正是他们自己在
“情海浮沉”的生活的理想画景？然而，我们必须向业已掉首不顾的静观者高声疾呼：“别跑开，请先听听古希腊民间智慧怎样阐述这种以如此妙不可言的欢乐展开在你眼前的生活”。有一个古老故事说：“昔日米达斯（Midas）王曾很久在林中寻找酒神的伴侣，聪明的西列诺斯（Se－lenus），但没有找到。当西列诺斯终于落到他手上时，王就问他：对于人绝好绝妙的是甚么呢？这位神灵呆若木鸡，一言不发，等到王强逼他，他终于在宏亮的笑声中说出这样的话：朝生暮死的可怜虫，无常与忧患的儿子，你为什么强逼我说出你最好是不要听的话呢？世间绝好的东西是你永远得不到的，――那就是不要降生，不要存在，成为乌有。但是，对于你次好的是――早死。”
Whoever approaches the Olympians
with a different religion in his heart, seeking moral elevation,
sanctity, spirituality, loving kindness, will presently be forced
to turn away from them in ill-humored disappointment. Nothing
in these deities reminds us of asceticism, high intellect, or
duty: we are confronted by luxuriant, triumphant existence,
which deifies the good and the bad indifferently. And the beholder
may find himself dismayed in the presence of such overflowing
life and ask himself what potion these heady people must have
drunk in order to behold, in whatever direction they looked,
Helen laughing back at them, the beguiling image of their own
existence. But we shall call out to this beholder, who has already
turned his back: Don't go! Listen first to what the Greeks themselves
have to say of this life, which spreads itself before you with
such puzzling serenity. An old legend has it that King Midas
hunted a long time in the woods for the wise Silenus, companion
of Dionysus, without being able to catch him. When he had finally
caught him the king asked him what he considered man's greatest
good. The daemon remained sullen and uncommunicative until finally,
forced by the king, he broke into a shrill laugh and spoke:
&Ephemeral wretch, begotten by accident and toil, why do you
force me to tell you what it would be your greatest boon not
to hear? What would be best for you is quite beyond your reach:
not to have been born, not to be, to be nothing. But
the second best is to die soon.&
　　奥林匹斯神界对这民间智慧的关系是怎样呢？就象临刑的殉道者对于自己的苦难感到一种狂喜的幻觉。
What is the relation of the Olympian
gods to this popular wisdom? It is that of the entranced vision
of the martyr to his torment.
　　现在，奥林匹斯灵山仿佛对我们敞开，露出它的根基来了。希腊人认识了而且感觉到生存之可怖可惧；为了能生活下去，他们不得不在恐惧面前设想这灿烂的奥林匹斯之梦的诞生。那面对着自然暴力的绝大恐惧，那无情地统御着一切知识的命数，那折磨着伟大爱人类者普罗密修斯的苍鹰，那聪明的奥狄普斯的可怕命运，那驱使奥瑞斯提斯去弑母的阿特柔斯家族灾殃；总之，一切野鬼山神的全部哲学，以及它使得忧郁的伊特鲁利亚人终于灭亡的神秘事例，――这一切，都被希腊人借赖奥林匹斯的艺术的缓冲世界一次又一次战胜了；这一切毕竟被遮掩住，从眼前隐退了。为了能生活下去，由于这个迫切的要求，希腊人必须创造这些神灵；我们不妨设想这创造的过程大致如下，快乐的奥林匹斯神统，是通过梦神的爱美冲动，慢慢地从原来的恐怖的铁旦神统①演变而成的，正如蔷薇的蓓蕾从多刺的丛林葩发那样。假如希腊人不是从荣光高照的希腊神灵得到生存意义的启示，试问这个如此敏感，如此热衷于欲望，而独能担当大难的民族怎样能够忍受人生呢？正是这种产生艺术，使得生活丰富多彩，引诱人活下去的艺术冲动，促使奥林匹斯神界诞生，希腊的“意志”就以这神界为明镜，照见自己容光焕发。所以，神是人生的印证，因为神本身也过着人类的生活，――这是唯一令人满意的神正论。生存在这样的神灵之煦光下，才使人感到生存本身值得追求。对于荷马的英雄，真正的悲哀莫大于身死，尤其是早死：所以现在我们不妨把西列诺斯的警句颠倒过来，以论希腊人：“对于他们。最坏的是早死，其次是终有一天会死。”这种哀鸣一旦发出之后，便再度听到短命的阿客琉斯的响应，他就抱怨秋叶飘零似的人生变幻，和英雄时代的日益衰微。旷世英雄本不该眷恋人生，何况他宁可生而为奴隶。然而，希腊的“意志”，到了梦神出现的阶段，这样热切地渴望现世生活，这位荷马英雄又觉得自己与生存意志吻合为一，所以生的哀歌也就成为生的礼赞②。
①据古希腊神话，铁旦神族是宙斯统治以前的神统，被宙斯推翻，尼采在本文中使 “铁旦”这词，往往指希腊文明时代以前的原始社会的自然状态、自然冲动、自然道德观等等。
　　②在荷马史诗中，英雄阿客琉斯知道自己命短，便哀叹人生之无常，及他死后，又谓宁可生而为奴隶，也不愿死而为鬼。
Now the Olympian magic mountain
opens itself before us, showing us its very roots. The Greeks
were keenly aware of the terrors and
order to be able to live at all they had to place before them
the shining fantasy of the Olympians. Their tremendous distrust
of the titanic forces of nature: Moira, mercilessly
enthroned beyon the vulture which fed upon
the great philanthropist P the terrible lot drawn
by wise O the curse on the house of Atreus which brought
Orestes to the murder of his mother: that whole Panic philosophy,
in short, with its mythic examples, by which the gloomy Etruscans
perished, the Greeks conquered--or at least hid from view--again
and again by means of this artificial Olympus. In order to live
at all the Greeks had to construct these deities. The Apollinian
need for beauty had to develop the Olympian hierarchy of joy
by slow degrees from the original titanic hierarchy of terror,
as roses are seen to break from a thorny thicket. How else could
life have been borne by a race so hypersensitive, so emotionally
intense, so equipped for suffering? The same drive which called
art into being as a completion and consummation of existence,
and as a guarantee of further existence, gave rise also to that
Olympian realm which acted as a transfiguring mirror to the
Hellenic will. The gods justified human life by living it themselves--the
only satisfactory theodicy ever invented. To exist in the clear
sunlight of such deities was now felt to be the highest good,
and the only real grief suffered by Homeric man was inspired
by the thought of leaving that sunlight, especially when the
departure seemed imminent. Now it became possible to stand the
wisdom of Silenus on its head and proclaim that it was the worst
evil for man to die soon, and second worst for him to die at
all. Such laments as arise now arise over short-lived Achilles,
over the generations ephemeral as leaves, the decline of the
heroic age. It is not unbecoming to even the greatest hero to
yearn for an afterlife, though it be as a day laborer. So impetuously,
during the Apollinian phase, does man's will desire to remain
on earth, so identified does he become with existence, that
even his lament turns to a song of praise.
　　到此，我们应该指出：现代人所渴望去静观的这种和谐，亦即人与自然的合一（席勒使用“素朴”这术语来表示这意境），绝不是这样简单的，自然自发，仿佛难免的一种境界，也不是在任何一种文化门前必然见到的人间乐园。只有浪漫主义时代才相信这点；当时，人们想象艺术家有如卢梭的爱弥儿。妄想在荷马身上发现象爱弥儿那样在自然怀抱中养育出来的艺术家。凡在艺术上发现有“素朴”的场合，我们都认为这是梦神文化的最大效果，这种文化往往必须首先推翻原始的铁旦王国，杀掉魔怪，然后凭它的有力的幻象和可爱的幻想，战胜了静观世界底阴森可怕的深渊和悲天悯人的敏感。可是，我们就甚少能达到这种心醉神迷于假象之美的素朴境界，荷马的崇高真是不可言诠：他个人对待梦神型的民间文化，正如个别梦境艺术家对待一般人民与自然的梦想能力那样。所谓荷马的“素朴”，只能理解为梦境幻想的绝对胜利，它是自然为了达到目的而常常使用的一种幻想。幻象掩障了真正的目的，当你伸手去把握这幻象时，自然就借你的幻想达到它的目的。在希腊人，“意志”要求在天才和艺术境界的美化作用中静观自己；芸芸众生为了颂扬自己，必须首先觉得是颂扬；他们必须在更高境界里再看见自己，而无须这完美的静观世界来督促或责备。这就是美之境界，希腊人在那里见到反映自己的面影――奥林匹斯神灵。凭借这种美之反映，希腊的“意志”就能对抗它在艺术方面的悲天悯人的才能和智慧；而荷马这位素朴艺术家便巍峨矗立，象一个凯旋碑！
It should have become apparent
by now that the harmony with nature which we late comers regard
with such nostalgia, and for which Schiller has coined the cant
term na&ve, is by no means a simple and inevitable
condition to be found at the gateway to every culture, a kind
of paradise. Such a belief could have been endorsed only by
a period for which Rousseau's Emile was an artist and Homer
just such an artist nurtured in the bosom of nature. Whenever
we encounter &na&veté& in art, we are face to face with the
ripest fruit of Apollinian culture--which must always triumph
first over titans, kill monsters, and overcome the somber contemplation
of actuality, the intense susceptibility to suffering, by means
of illusions strenuously and zestfully entertained. But how
rare are the instances of true na&veté, of that complete identification
with the beauty of appearance! It is this achievement which
makes Homer so magnificent--Homer, who, as a single individual,
stood to Apollinian popular culture in the same relation as
the individual dream artist to the oneiric capacity of a race
and of nature generally. The na&veté of Homer must be viewed
as a complete victory of Apollinian illusion. Nature often uses
illusions of this sort in order to accomplish its secret purposes.
The true goal is covered over by a phantasm. We stretch out
our hands to the latter, while nature, aided by our deception,
attains the former. In the case of the Greeks it was the will
wishing to behold itself in the work of art, in the transcendence
but in order so to behold itself its creatures had
first to view themselves as glorious, to transpose themselves
to a higher sphere, without having that sphere of pure contemplation
either challenge them or upbraid them with insufficiency. It
was in that sphere of beauty that the Greeks saw the Olympians
as it was by means of that aesthetic mirror
that the Greek will opposed suffering and the somber wisdom
of suffering which always accompanies artistic talent. As a
monument to its victory stands Homer, the na&ve artist.
　　关于这种素朴的艺术家，若以梦境为喻，可以给我们一些启发。试设想一个做梦的人；他沉湎于梦境而不愿惊扰其梦，对自己说：“是梦吧，我索性梦下去呵！”我们由此可以推断：他在梦的静观中体验到一种深刻的内心快感；另一方面，为了能在静观中心满意足地梦下去，他必须完全忘掉白昼现实以及迫人的忧患。所以，凭解梦神阿波罗的指导，我们对这一切现象可以作如下的阐明：虽然在生活的两面，在醒和梦中，前者确实似乎是无比地更可取，更重要、更可贵、更值得体味，而且是唯一身受的生活；然而，若论我们身为其现象的存在之神秘根源，我坦白地主张我们对于梦也应予以相当的重视，虽则这似乎是奇谈妙论。因为我在性灵方面愈觉察出这种万能的艺术冲动，见到它力求表现为假象并且通过假象而得救的热情，我便愈觉得有必要作如下的形而上学假设：真正的存在和太一，这种永劫和矛盾，同样也需要醉心的幻影，快乐的假象，不断地来救济它；我们既然置身在这种假象中，而且是由它构成的，就势必觉得它是真正的虚无，是时间、空间、因果的无穷变幻，换句话说，是经验的实在，假如我们暂时不看自己的“实在”，假如我们把我们的经验的实在，和一般的世界的实在，看作太一所不断显现的表象，那就不妨把梦看作假象的假象，从而看作原始的假象快感之高度的满足。正因此故，性灵的心灵深处对于素朴艺术家和素朴艺术品，亦即对假象的假象，感到难以形容的愉快。拉斐尔是这些不朽的素朴艺术家之一，他在一幅象征画中，给我们绘出假象转化为假象的过程，素朴艺术家以及梦神文化的原始过程。在他的画“耶稣变容”的下半幅，凝神的孩子，失望的仵工，困惑不安的信徒，反映出原始而永恒的痛苦，世界的唯一根基，画中的“假象”就是万物之源的永恒矛盾的反照。现在，从这一假象，宛若袭来一股芬芳的天香，升起了一个新的虚幻的假象世界，但是置身于第一个假象中的人们却视而不见――它是飘荡在最纯粹福乐中的浮光，它是在身心舒畅时睁目惊叹的观照。这里，在最崇高的艺术象征中，我们体会到了梦神的美之世界及其根基，西列诺斯的可怕的警句，我们凭直觉领悟到这两者的互相依存。然而，梦神再度以个性原则之化身的姿态出现在我们面前。唯有这样，才能完全达到太一的终极目的，它通过假象而得救了。梦神以他的崇高姿态对我们指出，这个痛苦的世界是完全必要的，因为，通过它，一个人才不得不产生救苦的幻觉。
We can learn something about that
na&ve artist through the analogy of dream. We can imagine the
dreamer as he calls out to himself, still caught in the illusion
of his dream and without disturbing it, &This is a dream, and
I want to go on dreaming,& and we can infer, on the one hand,
that he takes deep delight in the contemplation of his dream,
and, on the other, that he must have forgotten the day, with
its horrible importunity, so to enjoy his dream. Apollo, the
interpreter of dreams, will furnish the clue to what is happening
here. Although of the two halves of life--the waking and the
dreaming--the former is generally considered not only the more
important but the only one which is truly lived, I would, at
the risk of sounding paradoxical, propose the opposite view.
The more I have come to realize in nature those omnipotent formative
tendencies and, with them, an intense longing for illusion,
the more I feel inclined to the hypothesis that the original
Oneness, the ground of Being, ever suffering and contradictory,
time and again has need of rapt vision and delightful illusion
to redeem itself. Since we ourselves are the very stuff of such
illusions, we must view ourselves as the truly non-existent,
that is to say, as a perpetual unfolding in time, space, and
causality--what we label &empiric reality.& But if, for the
moment, we abstract from our own reality, viewing our empiric
existence, as well as the existence of the world at large, as
the idea of the original Oneness, produced anew each
instant, then our dreams will appear to us as illusions of illusions,
hence as a still higher form of satisfaction of the original
desire for illusion. It is for this reason that the very core
of nature takes such a deep delight in the naive artist and
the naive work of art, which likewise is merely the illusion
of an illusion. Raphael, himself one of those immortal &naive&
artists, in a symbolic canvas has illustrated that reduction
of illusion to further illusion which is the original act of
the naive artist and at the same time of all Apollinian culture.
In the lower half of his &Transfiguration,& through the figures
of the possessed boy, the despairing bearers, the helpless,
terrified disciples, we see a reflection of original pain, the
sole ground of being: &illusion& here is a reflection of eternal
contradiction, begetter of all things. From this illusion there
rises, like the fragrance of ambrosia, a new illusory world,
invisible to those enmeshed in the first: a radiant vision of
pure delight, a rapt seeing through wide open eyes. Here we
have, in a great symbol of art, both the fair world of Apollo
and its substratum, the terrible wisdom of Silenus, and we can
comprehend intuitively how they mutually require one another.
But Apollo appears to us once again as the apotheosis of the
principium individuationis, in whom the eternal goal
of the original Oneness, namely its redemption through illusion,
accomplishes itself. With august gesture the god shows us how
there is need for a whole world of torment in order for the
individual to produce the redemptive vision and to sit quietly
in his rocking rowboat in mid sea, absorbed in contemplation.
　　于是，在静观自得中，他安坐在这慈航，渡过苦海。这种个性原则的崇拜，作为一般强制的道德律来说，只有一条规律――个性规律，也就是说，守住个人的范围，亦即希腊人所谓适度。德行之神阿波罗，要求他的信徒们凡事适可而止，为了有节有度，则须有自知之明。所以，除了审美的要求以外，还提出“认识自己”和“慎勿过分”这些要求；同时，自矜与过份被视为非梦神境界的真正恶魔，从而是梦神以前的原始铁旦时代的特征，梦神以外的蛮邦世界的特征。普罗密修斯因为以铁旦神族之爱来爱人类，所以应该被苍鹰啄食；奥狄普斯因为解答斯芬克斯之谜的过分聪明，所以应该陷入纷乱的罪恶旋涡。狄尔斐之神阿波罗是这样的解释希腊古史的。
If this apotheosis of individuation
is to be read in normative terms, we may infer that there is
one norm only: the individual--or, more precisely, the observance
of the limits of the individual: sophrosune. As a moral
deity Apollo demands self-control from his people and, in order
to observe such self-control, a knowledge of self. And so we
find that the aesthetic necessity of beauty is accompanied by
the imperatives, &Know thyself,& and &Nothing too much.& Conversely,
excess and hubris come to be regarded as the hostile
spirits of the non-Apollinian sphere, hence as properties of
the pre-Apollinian era--the age of Titans --and the extra-Apollinian
world, that is to say the world of the barbarians. It was because
of his Titanic love of man that Prometheus had to be devoured
it was because of his extravagant wisdom which
succeeded in solving the riddle of the Sphinx that Oedipus had
to be cast into a whirlpool of crime: in this fashion does the
Delphic god interpret the Greek past.
　　同样，在梦神式希腊人看来，酒神文化的影响就似乎是铁旦的和野蛮的了，但同时他却不能不承认自己在心灵深处与那些倾覆了的铁旦神统和英雄们息息相通。不仅如此，他也觉得他的一切生活，尽管是美丽的、适度的，毕竟建筑在痛苦与知识之根基上，而酒神文化却对他揭露了这根基。试看，梦神就不能离开酒神而生存！那么，铁旦的和野蛮的教化之重要性，就不下于梦神的教化了。现在，试想这个以假象和适度为基础，以艺术为堤防的境界，酒神祭佳节的消魂荡魄的狂欢之声侵入这境界了，在这些歌声中，我们听到一切率性而行的大喜、大悲、大智、大慧、甚至镂心刻骨的呼啸；那末，我们试问：颂歌诗神阿波罗的幽灵似的琴音，同这恶魔似的民歌相比，还有甚么意义呢，在这种在陶醉中说出真理的艺术面前，假象之艺术的女神暗然失色！西列诺斯的智慧，对着这位静穆的奥林匹斯梦神高呼：“哀哉！哀哉！”此时，安分守己的个人便陷入陶然忘我之境，顿然忘掉梦神的清规戒律了。过份变成真理，物极必反，悲中生乐，这是发乎性灵心中的呼吁。所以，每当酒神文化入侵之时，梦神文化就被扬弃，被消灭。然而，反过来也是如此。每当酒神的进攻受到挫败，梦神的威严就显得空前地盛气凌人。因此，以我看，我只能把多里斯境界和多里斯艺术理解为梦神文化的惨淡经营的堡垒。因为，如此顽强、冷漠、警卫森严的艺术，如此严格尚武的训练，如此冷酷无情的政治制度，唯有不断反抗酒神文化的原始野性，才能维持长久。
The effects of the Dionysian spirit
struck the Apollinian Greeks as
could not disguise from themselves the fact that they were essentially
akin to chose deposed Titans and heroes. They felt more than
that: their whole existence, with its temperate beauty, rested
upon a base of suffering and knowledge which had been
hidden from them until the reinstatement of Dionysus uncovered
it once more. And lo and behold! Apollo found it impossible
to live without Dionysus. The elements of titanism and barbarism
fumed out to be quite as fundamental as the Apollinian element.
And now let us imagine how the ecstatic sounds of the Dionysian
rites penetrated ever more enticingly into that artificially
restrained and discreet world of illusion, how this clamor expressed
the whole outrageous gamut of nature--delight, grief, knowledge--even
to t and then let us imagine how the Apollinian
artist with his thin, monotonous harp music must have sounded
beside the demoniac chant of the multitude! The muses presiding
over the illusory arts paled before an art which enthusiastically
told the truth, and the wisdom of Silenus cried &Woe!& against
the serene Olympians. The individual, with his limits and moderations,
forgot himself in the Dionysian vortex and became oblivious
to the laws of Apollo. Indiscreet extravagance revealed itself
as truth, and contradiction, a delight born of pain, spoke out
of the bosom of nature. Wherever the Dionysian voice was heard,
the Apollinian norm seemed suspended or destroyed. Yet it is
equally true that, in those places where the first assault was
withstood, the prestige and majesty of the Delphic god appeared
more rigid and threatening than before. The only way I am able
to view Doric art and the Doric state is as a perpetual military
encampment of the Apollinian forces. An art so defiantly austere,
so ringed about with fortifications--an education so military
and exacting--a polity so ruthlessly cruel--could endure only
in a continual state of resistance against the titanic and barbaric
menace of Dionysus.
　　到此为止，我只发挥了我在本文章首的意见，即酒神与梦神两类型文化，新陈代谢而相得益彰，始终统辖着希腊天才。在梦神的爱美冲动统治下，荷马世界从青铜时代及其铁旦神统战争和严厉的民间哲学发展而成；荷马的“素朴”的繁荣又被酒神文化的滔滔狂潮淹没了；于是梦神文化起来反抗这种新势力，终于达到多里斯艺术和多里斯世界观的威严。这样，如果把希腊的古代史分为四大艺术阶段，我们现在就有必要进一步去探索这些发展和进步的终极目的，否则我们也许以为那最后达到的时代，多里斯艺术的时代，就是这些艺术冲动的高峰和归宿。到了那时代，阿提刻悲剧和酒神祭戏曲的崇高而著名的艺术作品出现在我们眼前，它们是这两种倾向的共同目标；久经波折之后，这两种倾向终于庆贺这段神秘的姻缘，产生了这个孩子――她既是安提戈妮（Antigone），又是嘉珊德拉（Cassandra）。
Up to this point I have developed
at some length a theme which was sounded at the beginning of
this essay: how the Dionysian and Apollinian elements, in a
continuous chain of creations, each enhancing the other, dominated
the H how from the Iron Age, with its battles of
Titans and its austere popular philosophy, there developed under
the aegis of Apollo the Hom how this &naive&
splendor was then absorbed once more by the Dionysian torrent,
and how, face to face with this new power, the Apollinian code
rigidified into the majesty of Doric art and contemplation.
If the earlier phase of Greek history may justly be broken down
into four major artistic epochs dramatizing the battle between
the two hostile principles, then we must inquire further (lest
Doric art appear to us as the acme and final goal of all these
striving tendencies) what was the true end toward which that
evolution moved. And our eyes will come to rest on the sublime
and much lauded achievement of the dramatic dithyramb and Attic
tragedy, as the commo whose mysterious
marriage, after long discord, ennobled itself with such a child,
at once Antigone and Cassandra.
　　现在，我们接近研究的真正目的了，我们的目的在于认识酒神兼梦神型的天才及其艺术作品，至少先要了解其初步的神秘结合。到此，我们将首先探讨这颗新芽怎样先在希腊世界出现，后来又发展为悲剧与酒神祭曲。关于这点，古希腊人自己就给我们一个象征的答案。他们把荷马和阿奇洛科斯的像并列刻在雕塑，饰物等等之上，视为希腊诗歌的始祖和持炬人，他们深深感到只有这两个匠心独运的同辈天才值得尊重，因为一股热情之流从他们发源，流遍希腊晚期的全部历史。荷马，这个潜心默想、白发苍苍的诗人，现在愕然看着狂放豪迈，驰骋人间的尚武诗人阿奇洛科斯的慷慨激昂的才华，现代美学只能把这解释为第一个客观诗人与第一个主观诗人分庭抗礼。这种说明对于我们无甚帮助，因为我们认为主观的艺术家不过是可怜的艺术家，而在各种艺术和艺术高峰尤其需要首先克服主观成份，从自我解放出来，制止个人的意志与欲望。真的，任何一件微不足道的作品，如果没有客观性，没有纯粹的超然的静观，我们就不相信它是真正艺术。所以，我们的美学必须首先答复这样的问题，就各时代的经验而言，所谓抒情诗人言必及“我”，总是对我们有声有色地歌唱自己的眷恋爱慕，那么这种诗人又怎能算是艺术家呢？比之荷马，阿奇洛科斯以他的愤恨轻蔑的呐喊，如醉如狂的热情，使我们惊心动魄；那么，号称第一个主观艺术家的他，岂不是非艺术家吗？然而，在这情况下：又怎样解释人们对他的崇敬，甚至客观艺术之策源地狄尔斐的不同凡响的神喻也尊他为诗人呢？
We are now approaching the central
concern of our inquiry, which has as its aim an understanding
of the Dionysian-Apollinian spirit, or at least an intuitive
comprehension of the mystery which made this conjunction possible.
Our first question must be: where in the Greek world is the
new seed first to be found which was later to develop into tragedy
and the dramatic dithyramb? Greek antiquity gives us a pictorial
clue when it represents in statues, on cameos, etc., Homer and
Archilochus side by side as ancestors and torchbearers of Greek
poetry, in the certainty that only these two are to be regarded
as truly original minds, from whom a stream of fire flowed onto
the entire later Greek world. Homer, the hoary dreamer, caught
in utter abstraction, prototype of the Apollinian naive artist,
stares in amazement at the passionate head of Archilochus, soldierly
servant of the Muses, knocked about by fortune. All that more
recent aesthetics has been able to add by way of interpretation
is that here the &objective& artist is confronted by the first
&subjective& artist. We find this interpretation of little use,
since to us the subjective artist is simply the bad artist,
and since we demand above all, in every genre and range of art,
a triumph over subjectivity, deliverance from the self, the
silencing of every pers since, in fact,
we cannot imagine the smallest genuine art work lacking objectivity
and disinterested contemplation. For this reason our aesthetic
must first solve the following problem: how is the lyrical poet
at all possible as artist--he who, according to the experience
of all times, always says &I& and recites to us the entire chromatic
scale of his passions and appetites? It is this Archilochus
who most disturbs us, placed there beside Homer, with the stridor
of his hate and mockery, the drunken outbursts of his desire.
Isn't he--the first artist to be called subjective--for that
reason the veritable non-artist? How, then, are we to explain
the reverence in which he was held as a poet, the honor done
him by the Delphic oracle, that seat of &objective& art, in
a number of very curious sayings?
席勒从心理方面观察，阐述他的创作过程，他自己虽然不能解释，但这似乎是可靠的。他承认，创作活动之前预备阶段的心情，并不是先在眼前或心中有一连串依照思维程序排列起来的映象，而毋宁是一种音乐情调。（“在我，感觉初时并没有明确固定的目的，这是后来才形成的。我先有某种音乐性的心情，只有在这之后才产生诗的思想。”）此外，让我再指出一切古代抒情诗最主要的一种现象――往往抒情诗人与音乐家自然而然结合于一身甚且同是一人。就这点来说，现代抒情诗，在相形之下，就好象没有头颅的神象了。所以，根据上述的审美形而上学，我们可以说明抒情诗人如下。首先，抒情诗人，作为醉境艺术家，是完全同“太一”及其痛苦和矛盾彼此一致的；设使音乐堪称为世界的复制或再铸，就不妨说抒情诗人模仿太一而制为音乐。但是，现在在梦神的感召下，他见到音乐变成象征的梦景。于是，原始的痛苦模糊恍惚地反映在音乐上，又通过假象获得救济，便产生第二次的反映，成为一种独特的象征或范本。艺术家在进入醉境的过程中，已经扬弃了他的主观性。现在，使他感到自己与宇宙心灵同化的那幅画景，成为这样的梦景：它体现了假象世界的原始矛盾，原始苦恼，乃至原始快乐。所以，抒情诗人的“我”是从他心灵深处发出的声音，现代美学家所谓抒情诗人的“主观性”不过是自以为是的幻想而已。当第一个希腊抒情诗人阿奇洛科斯对吕甘伯斯（Lyoambas）的女儿表示热恋又表示蔑视之时①，我们不仅见到他的热情如醉如狂地悸动，我们还见到酒神和他的侍女们，见到酩酊大醉的阿奇洛科斯陶然的睡态，正如欧里庇德斯在“酒神侍者”中所描写的在高山草地上日中高卧那样。现在，梦神走近来了，用月桂枝触他一下，于是睡诗人的酒神音乐的魔力便发出如画的火花，这就是抒情诗，它的最高发展的形式谓之悲剧与酒神祭曲。
Schiller has thrown some light
on his own manner of composition by a psychological observation
which seems inexplicable to himself without, however, giving
him pause. Schiller confessed that, prior to composing, he experienced
not a logically connected series of images but rather a
musical mood. &With me emotion is at the beginning without
dea those ideas do not arise until later
on. A certain musical disposition of mind comes first, and after
follows the poetical idea.& If we enlarge on this, taking into
account the most important phenomenon of ancient poetry, by
which I mean that union-- nay identity--everywhere considered
natural, between musician and poet (alongside which our modern
poetry appears as the statue of a god without a head), then
we may, on the basis of the aesthetics adumbrated earlier, explain
the lyrical poet in the following manner. He is, first and foremost,
a Dionysian artist, become wholly identified with the original
Oneness, its pain and contradiction, and producing a replica
of that Oneness as music, if music may legitimately be seen
as a rep however, this music becomes visible
to him again, as in a dream similitude, through the Apollinian
dream influence. That reflection, without image or idea, of
original pain in music, with its redemption through illusion,
now produces a second reflection as a single simile or example.
The artist had abrogated his subjectivity earlier, during the
Dionysian phase: the image which now reveals to him his oneness
with the heart of the world is a dream scene showing forth vividly,
together with original pain, the original delight of illusion.
The &I& thus sounds out o what recent writers
on aesthetics speak of as &subjectivity& is a mere figment.
When Archilochus, the first lyric poet of the Greeks, hurls
both his frantic love and his contempt at the daughters of Lycambes,
it is not his own passion that we see dancing before us in an
orgiastic frenzy: we see Dionysus and the maenads, we see the
drunken reveler Archilochus, sunk down in sleep--as Euripides
describes him for us in the Bacchae, asleep on a high
mountain meadow, in the midday sun--and now Apollo approaches
him and touches him with his laurel. The sleeper's enchantment
through Dionysian music now begins to emit sparks of imagery,
poems which, at their point of highest evolution, will bear
the name of tragedies and dramatic dithyrambs.
　　造型艺术家，乃至与他近似的史诗诗人，沉湎在形象的纯粹观照里。酒神型音乐家则无需形象，他自己就是纯粹观照的原始痛苦及其原始反响。抒情的天才独能感觉到一个画景象征世界从神秘的玄同忘我之境中产生。这一境界另有一种色彩，一种因果，一种速度，与造型艺术家和史诗诗人的世界绝不相同。因为后者生活在这些画景中，而只有在画景中才欣然自得，他静观万象，秋毫不爽，却依依不舍，乐此而不疲。甚至愤怒的阿客琉斯的形象，在他看来，也不过是一幅画景而已。他怀着追求幻梦的快感来欣赏阿客琉斯的愤怒表情。所以，在这幻影的掩护下，他就不致与诗中人物共甘苦，同呼吸。反之，抒情诗人所描写的画景不是别的，正是他本人，而且仿佛只是他自己的各种投影，因此他好象就是宇宙的运动的中心，可以高谈自我，不过，这个“我”，当然不是清醒的实践中人的“我”，而是潜藏在万象根基中唯一真正存在的永恒的“我”，而凭借这个我的反映，抒情的天才就能够洞察万象的根基。现在，我们再假定：他在这些形象中也见到自己是非天才，换句话说，见到他的“主体”，他那一股主观的热情与激动，对着某一在他看来似乎是真实的对象而发；那时，抒情的天才就仿佛与非天才结合为一，而天才仿佛是自动地说出“我”这个字。然而，这个表面现象再不能把我们引入迷途，虽则有些人确实会被它迷惑，而把抒情诗人称为主观诗人。其实，热情磅礴，既爱人类又恨人类的阿奇洛科斯，不过是天才的一个幻影而已；此时此际，他已经再也不是阿奇洛科斯，而是世界天才假借阿奇洛科斯其人象征地说出自己的原始痛苦；但是具有主观意志和欲望的人阿奇洛科斯，却无论何时也不能是个诗人。然而，这位抒情诗人也不一定只能见到通过阿奇洛科斯其人反映永恒存在的这一现象；希腊悲剧就证明了：抒情诗人的幻想世界，同这种当然与它有密切关系的现象，相去甚远。
The sculptor, as well as his brother,
the epic poet, is committed to the pure contemplation of images.
The Dionysian musician, himself imageless, is nothing but original
pain and reverberation of the image. Out of this mystical process
of un-selving, the poet's spirit feels a whole world of images
and similitudes arise, which are quite different in hue, causality,
and pace from the images of the sculptor or narrative poet.
While the last lives in those images, and only in them, with
joyful complacence, and never tires of scanning them down to
the most minute features, while even the image of angry Achilles
is no more for him than an image whose irate countenance
he enjoys with a dreamer's delight in appearance--so that this
mirror of appearance protects him from complete fusion with
his characters--the lyrical poet, on the other hand, himself
becomes his images, his images are objectified versions of himself.
Being the active center of that world he may boldly speak in
the first person, only his &I& is not that of the actual waking
man, but the &I& dwelling, truly and eternally, in the ground
of being. It is through the reflections of that &I& that the
lyric poet beholds the ground of being. Let us imagine, next,
how he views himself too among these reflections--as non-genius,
that is, as his own subject matter, the whole teeming crowd
of his passions and intentions directed to
and when it now appears as though the poet and the nonpoet joined
to him were one, and as though the former were using the pronoun
&I,& we are able to see through this appearance, which has deceived
those who have attached the label &subjective& to the lyrical
poet. The man Archilochus, with his passionate loves and hates,
is really only a vision of genius, a genius who is no longer
merely Archilochus but the genius of the universe, expressing
its pain through the similitude of Archilochus the man. Archilochus,
on the other hand, the subjectively willing and desiring human
being, can never be a poet. Nor is it at all necessary for the
poet to see only the phenomenon of the man Archilochus before
him as a reflection of Eternal Being: the world of tragedy shows
us to what extent the vision of the poet can remove itself from
the urgent, immediate phenomenon.
　　叔本华并不隐瞒抒情诗人的审美静观是哲学上一个难题，但是他自以为找到了答案，但我并不完全同意这个答案。不错，在他关于音乐的深刻哲理中，他独能掌握了断然解决这难