Philosophy Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for those interested in the study of the fundamental nature of knowledge, reality, and existence. It only takes a minute to sign up.
Sign up to join this community
I can't find a passage from one of Nietzsche's book (Thus Spoke Zarathustra?) about its opinion on modernity (the age he was contemporean of) and culture.
As far as I recall, the idea was that his contemporaries had a kind of mondane and passive approach to art, that they called "culture", which Nietzsche mocks.
For him, art should be experienced much more subjectively, and not be subsumed under a phenomenon called "culture".
Nietzsche thought modernity was synonymous with mediocrity, degeneration, and decline to such a deep and wide extent that its degeneration can be found in science and art, as well as in and on our bodies. There is no area of our existence that is unaffected by this contamination. Modernity is the era of a Life-destroying morality, where the the weakest and puniest people are preserved and made equal to the status of a great world historical conqueror like Julius Caesar or Napoleon. Modernity for him is the era of feminism, democracy, universalism, workers rights, and universal education. Nietzsche sees these as an assault upon the ancient order which drove the 'true' progress of civilization. So modernity, for Nietzsche is weakness, sickness, degeneration, and their triumph over an antiquity defined by cruelty, apartheid, caste systems, rank order, and universal slavery. His reaction to democratic movements, to enfranchisement, to equality, and especially to abolition of slavery form the context of his intervention into what he saw as the sorry state of European cultural production during his time. There can be no real cultural production without slavery, for Nietzsche. He had already by Zarathustra underlined the necessity of slavery in several texts.
Spring 1885-Autumn 1886, 2[13]
…I believe that the great forwarding-driving and relentless democratic movement of Europe — that which calls itself 'progress' — and likewise even its preparation and moral prefiguration, Christianity — at bottom signifies only the tremendous instinctive overall conspiracy of the herd against all that is master, beast of prey, hermit and Caesar, in favor of the preservation and raising up of all the weak, oppressed, underprivileged, mediocre, semi-misfits, as a protracted slave rebellion against every kind of master, secretive at first then increasingly more self-conscious, ultimately against even the concept of 'master,' as a life and death war against every morality that springs from the womb and consciousness of a higher stronger masterful kind of human being — such a one requires slavery in some form and under some name as its foundation and condition. I believe, finally, that every enhancement so far in the type of human being was the work of an aristocratic society that believed in the long ladder of order or rank and value-difference between one person and another and required slavery.
p317, CW vol 16
