{"id":{"repo_id":"mcmaster","oai_identifier":"oai:macsphere.mcmaster.ca:11375/14025"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/mcmaster/oai:macsphere.mcmaster.ca:11375/14025","repository":{"repo_id":"mcmaster","name":"McMaster University","base_url":"https://macsphere.mcmaster.ca/server/oai/request"},"display":{"title":"Tragedy and Affirmation","abstract":"<p>This thesis offers an interpretation of a passage from section 18 of Nietzsche's The Birth of Tragedy. In the passage, Nietzsche makes two puzzling claims which have generated interest in the recent secondary literature: (1) he says that the effect of tragedy is an illusion, and (2) he equates tragic culture with Buddhism. Some commentators have argued that these two claims contradict the book's central theses. I canvass two such readings: Maudemarie Clark's \"standard interpretation\" and Paul de Man's \"postmodernist interpretation.\" I examine and reject both readings on the grounds that they fail to interpret some of Nietzsche's key terminology correctly. In opposition to these interpretations, I then formulate a more positive reading of section 18 which establishes that both claims are actually consistent with the rest of the text.</p>","abstract_html":"&lt;p&gt;This thesis offers an interpretation of a passage from section 18 of Nietzsche&#x27;s The Birth of Tragedy. In the passage, Nietzsche makes two puzzling claims which have generated interest in the recent secondary literature: (1) he says that the effect of tragedy is an illusion, and (2) he equates tragic culture with Buddhism. Some commentators have argued that these two claims contradict the book&#x27;s central theses. I canvass two such readings: Maudemarie Clark&#x27;s &quot;standard interpretation&quot; and Paul de Man&#x27;s &quot;postmodernist interpretation.&quot; I examine and reject both readings on the grounds that they fail to interpret some of Nietzsche&#x27;s key terminology correctly. In opposition to these interpretations, I then formulate a more positive reading of section 18 which establishes that both claims are actually consistent with the rest of the text.&lt;/p&gt;","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Lawrence, Jeff"],"institution":null,"degree_name":null,"degree_level":null,"degree_discipline":null,"degree_department":"Philosophy","school":null,"contributors":[],"advisors":["Ajzenstat, S."],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":1999,"date_issued":"1999-05","date_published":"1999-05","updated_at":"2026-08-21T16:46:30Z","subjects":["Philosophy"],"languages":[],"rights":[],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier.other","label":"Dc Identifier Other","values":["opendissertations/8855","9932","5347223"],"render_values":[{"text":"opendissertations/8855","href":null,"code":true},{"text":"9932","href":null,"code":true},{"text":"5347223","href":null,"code":true}]}]},"links":{"outbound_url":"http://hdl.handle.net/11375/14025","outbound_label":"Handle","outbound_source":"dc:identifier.uri"},"source_record":{"url":"https://macsphere.mcmaster.ca/server/oai/request?verb=GetRecord&metadataPrefix=dim&identifier=oai%3Amacsphere.mcmaster.ca%3A11375%2F14025","prefix":"dim"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor.advisor","label":"Advisor","values":["Ajzenstat, S."]},{"key":"dc:contributor.department","label":"Department","values":["Philosophy"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Lawrence, Jeff"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date.accessioned","label":"Dc Date Accessioned","values":["2014-06-18T17:06:03Z"]},{"key":"dc:date.available","label":"Dc Date Available","values":["2014-06-18T17:06:03Z"]},{"key":"dc:date.issued","label":"Date","values":["1999-05"]},{"key":"dc:type","label":"Dc Type","values":["thesis"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["Philosophy"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier.other","label":"Dc Identifier Other","values":["opendissertations/8855","9932","5347223"]},{"key":"dc:identifier.uri","label":"Identifier URI","values":["http://hdl.handle.net/11375/14025"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["<p>This thesis offers an interpretation of a passage from section 18 of Nietzsche's The Birth of Tragedy. In the passage, Nietzsche makes two puzzling claims which have generated interest in the recent secondary literature: (1) he says that the effect of tragedy is an illusion, and (2) he equates tragic culture with Buddhism. Some commentators have argued that these two claims contradict the book's central theses. I canvass two such readings: Maudemarie Clark's \"standard interpretation\" and Paul de Man's \"postmodernist interpretation.\" I examine and reject both readings on the grounds that they fail to interpret some of Nietzsche's key terminology correctly. In opposition to these interpretations, I then formulate a more positive reading of section 18 which establishes that both claims are actually consistent with the rest of the text.</p>"]},{"key":"dc:description.degree","label":"Dc Description Degree","values":["Master of Arts (MA)"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["Tragedy and Affirmation"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor.advisor":["Ajzenstat, S."],"dc:contributor.department":["Philosophy"],"dc:creator":["Lawrence, Jeff"],"dc:date.accessioned":["2014-06-18T17:06:03Z"],"dc:date.available":["2014-06-18T17:06:03Z"],"dc:date.issued":["1999-05"],"dc:description.abstract":["<p>This thesis offers an interpretation of a passage from section 18 of Nietzsche's The Birth of Tragedy. In the passage, Nietzsche makes two puzzling claims which have generated interest in the recent secondary literature: (1) he says that the effect of tragedy is an illusion, and (2) he equates tragic culture with Buddhism. Some commentators have argued that these two claims contradict the book's central theses. I canvass two such readings: Maudemarie Clark's \"standard interpretation\" and Paul de Man's \"postmodernist interpretation.\" I examine and reject both readings on the grounds that they fail to interpret some of Nietzsche's key terminology correctly. In opposition to these interpretations, I then formulate a more positive reading of section 18 which establishes that both claims are actually consistent with the rest of the text.</p>"],"dc:description.degree":["Master of Arts (MA)"],"dc:identifier.other":["opendissertations/8855","9932","5347223"],"dc:identifier.uri":["http://hdl.handle.net/11375/14025"],"dc:subject":["Philosophy"],"dc:title":["Tragedy and Affirmation"],"dc:type":["thesis"]},"updated_at":"2026-08-21T16:46:30Z"}