Categories: uncategorized
Date: 16 September 2005 22:10:57
I've had a busy day. Apart from doing an hour-and-a-half(!) of rehabilitatory walking I managed to get round to doing some long overdue Nietzsche pondering. Q. Is there a dichotomy between Nietzsche's implicit Hyperboreanism (i.e., towards the start of The Antichrist) and his refusal of "the beyond"? Now don't get me wrong hyperboreanism sounds grrrreeaat. Kind of like an eternal recurrence of the second summer of love (Ibiza, 1988), suntan guaranteed and no hangovers. H'b'ism will surely get a look in when it comes to writing down my religious self-description (when is the next census?), along with Jedi, Zen, Pantagruelist, agnostic, hoaxer, etc, etc. But isn't this just a tactic of myth replacement? i.e., replacing the myth of "the beyond" with the hyperborean myth? And doesn't the hyperborean myth then become the new "beyond"?
A. (provisional, as of 16/9/05). Hyperboreanism only becomes the "new beyond" if one fails to (metaphorically speaking of course) live in Hyperborea, in which case it ceases to be beyond, but is that which is most immediately "at hand", imminent.
It's tough being this busy....