Regeneration : $b A reply to Max NordauHake, A. Egmont (Alfred Egmont)
Philosophy
Regeneration : $b A reply to Max Nordau
Hake, A. Egmont (Alfred Egmont)
Nordau, Max Simon, 1849-1923. Entartung; World history
Many such symbols were not symbols when first introduced into the
language, but nouns that stood for things, or beings, supposed to be
perfectly real. Thus, for instance, the word “devil,” which in olden
times stood for a satanic majesty, adorned with horns and tail, has
now become a convenient symbol, a thing only too real, but covering
such immense ground, and presenting such innumerable aspects, that a
symbol expressing the whole conception is extremely convenient. Nothing
is commoner than to hear a clergyman use the words “the devil” in his
sermon, though it be part of his creed and of his teachings that God is
so omnipresent throughout the universe that there is not a square inch
for a personal devil to place his foot on.
It is this kind of symbolism which Nordau is bent on crucifying as
degeneration. As we have already said, there is a general tendency
among artists to indulge in it, in order to produce moods and suggest
emotions. Thus, for example, in the picture spoken of in our last
chapter, “Dante’s Dream,” an atmosphere of love is represented by red
birds, and sleep is represented by poppies strewn on the floor. In
Rossetti’s picture Nordau would have taken objection to such symbols,
though he seems reconciled to the symbols used by Raphael and his
school, and would probably not object to those of German allegorical
painters and sculptors.
It is significant that the symbolism which he most vehemently holds up
as a stigma of degeneration, is that of the modern French poets who
have made religious symbolism their speciality. It is not difficult to
see why these have been chosen as the scapegoats for the symbolism of
every art and every country. It is true they boldly call themselves
symbolists. But this would not be enough to elicit from Nordau a
chapter of forty-five pages. Besides calling themselves symbolists,
they have the audacity to be French. Their symbolism is religious, and,
what is worse, is Roman Catholic, and, what is worst of all, it is
antagonistic to science.
Though the now prevailing love for symbols does not always manifest
itself in a religious way, it is natural for it to find its widest
application in speeches and writings on religion. Religion avowedly
deals with things not of this earth, is based not on knowledge and
investigation, but on faith, and appeals not to our intellect, but to
our emotional nature.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account