|
Somebody wrote, over at Onelist : > : A list like this would be devoted more to Dionysus is the Hellenic god of wine, of intoxication, both physical and emotional. He represents raw, unhampered (and, to a degree) undisciplined inspiration and emotion. The qualities of a poet in a tavern. Apollo is a god of reason, restraint and purity. To a degree. The qualities of a school teacher, or a scientist at work. To say that a thing is "apollonian" or "dionysian", one might say, is to say that its character is what one would expect, of something inspired by one of these two deities. To take an example, consider the uses of "Apollonian" and "Dionysian" in the conducting of music. If a conductor has put in an Apollonian performance, he has stayed very faithfully to the score, almost mechanically. Taken to an excess, the results can be listened to, but they are a little dry. Music of the Baroque era tends to have a very Apollonian quality to it, by its very nature. Picture a harpsicord. The notes are very precise and clean, the player has technical mastery, and the music is very pretty, in a very cerebral, and maybe slightly cold way. If he has put in a Dionysian performance, he has put a little more passion into his work, bringing in those broad flourishes that bring emotion to a piece. (Think of Wagnerian opera). The emotions are stirred, but in excess, the enjoyment that comes from good craftsmanship suffers. The notes almost seem bruised. The music is enjoyable for a while, but the enjoyment can not be sustained. A great performance balances these two impulses. This is a sort of balance that no one director could achieve on his own. Each will have his own proclivities. Were he able to hear no music, save that which he directed, he would be his only influence, and his work would become a charicature of itself, growing more extreme and grotesque in its own way. A great director, or even a good one, will listen to the performances of other orchestras under other directors, and occasionally say "I like the way he handled that passage. Let's try something like that". Will it be precisely like that? No, of course not. A creative work is the spontaneous creation of a moment, reigned in to varying degrees by the discipline of craftsmanship. He will take that creation within himself, and his subconscious will transform it into something distinctively his own, being slightly transformed itself in the process. Some degree of balance is restored, within the composer himself. As with directors, so with deities. Their bodies of worshippers are as the orchestras, and the lives they lead, under the guidance of their divinities, are as the music. For the gods to set aside their disagreements and conflicts, would be akin to the directors no longer listening to, or commenting on each others music. Balance and moderation can only be achieved through that conflict, by each finding that his work has been subjected to the scrutiny, criticism (and, occasionally opposition) of others, because there is no way, by mere logic, to establish what moderation and balance are. The end result of "absolute love and perfect trust", in the anti-critical sense of 1990s era Political Correctness, among directors, would be music that one couldn't listen to. Among gods or religious leaders, it would be a random grab bag of extremist positions at first, and raving insanity is the end, as the worshippers came to find that they could no longer live with each other, or even themselves. The acceptance of conflict and opposition between the gods, and the traditions they inspire, by those gods and their worshippers, is a reflection of the presence of both humility and hope. Humility on the part of the deities, in that they recognize that even their understanding has limits. Humility of the part of the worshippers, in that they accept that their limits will be even sharper still. Hope, in that deity and man alike recognize the existence of a process, which, if followed with a sustainable degree of civility, will allow them to come to a resolution of their difficulties that the wisdom of each, taken individually, would be inadequate to achieve. But even hope is a thing to be taken in moderation. It is far too easy for man and god alike to take the path of least resistance, and turn a deaf ear to just protest and criticism, even going so far are to confuse this lack of motivation with strength of character. For this reason, a small amount of turmoil must be accepted as the price for avoiding far greater turmoil later. It is for this reason that we speak, not of the unattainable goal of perfect harmony, but merely of a sustainable level of civility. Without anger and conflict, there is no growth or change. In Hellenic Traditionalism, unlike Pauline Christianity, and some forms of Neopaganism, we accept that balance and moderation can only be achieved by such a struggle between opposites. We do not imagine that conflict is a thing that can be "transcended" by the "truly enlightened", or that the gods will (or should) all act in accord. Which brings us to the divide between the Apollonian and Dionysian strains of Paganism (or Traditionalism). This is how far we are, right now. Click here to return. |