Orbis Litterarum 54: 424438. I Y Y Y Printed in Denmark. AN rights reserved

Copyright 0 Munksgaard 1999

OlQBZS Z i t t e m m ISSN 0105-7510

Estrangement from the Deed and the Memory thereof: Freud and Jung on the Pale Criminal in N ietzsc he’s Zarafhus fra Paul Bishop, University of Glasgow, Great Britain

The figure of the Pale Criminal is delineated by Nietzsche in the first part of Also sprach Zarathustra, and both Freud and Jung discuss this figure in their writings on psychology. In his Einige Charaktertypen aus der psychoanalytischen Arheij (1 9 16), Freud relates the Pale Criminal to his discovery that many of his pa- tients found a sense of relief when confessing to crimes commit- ted in puberty, and he suggests that behind this lies a sense of (Oedipal) guilt which preceded their specific criminal deeds. For C. G. Jung in Nach der Katastrophe (1945), on the other hand, the Pale Criminal was a useful image to explain the alleged col- lective guilt which the Germans experienced after the Second World War, although his analysis serves to reveal his own un- conscious complicity. By examining what Freud and Jung say about the Pale Criminal, I argue that we can arrive at a better understanding of Nietzsche’s figure as well as an original per- spective on the relative interpretative strengths and weaknesses of two psychoanalytic schools.

In this paper, I shall discuss the figure of the “Pale Criminal” from Nietzsche’s Zarathustra and go on to examine the use which Freud and Jung make of it.’ For by analysing what psychoanalysis and analytical psychology say about the Pale Criminal, we can not only understand this figure better, but the interpretations of it by Freud and Jung shed light in turn on their own psychologies and the respective strengths and weaknesses of their in- terpretative strategies2 From this analysis, the key themes for Nietzsche, Freud and Jung of estrangement and memory emerge in a new light.

“Of the Pale Criminal [Vom bleichen Verbrecher]” is the sixth chapter of Part I, written in 1883-1884, of Thus spake Zarathustra [Also sprach Zarathu- stra]. Zarathustra is arguably Nietzsche’s most important work and undoubt- edly his most influential one. The Pale Criminal forms part of the ancillary

Freud and Jung in Nietzsche’s Zarathustra 425

cast of characters introduced in the course of Nietzsche’s prose poem which, as Gadamer has recognized, could also be called a drama.3 These characters include (in Part I) the Saint in the Forest, the Old Man in the Forest, (in Part 11) the Prophet, (in Part 111) the Frothing Fool, and (in Part IV) the Ma- gician, the Shadow, and the Ugliest Man, to name but a few. Although the figure of the Pale Criminal plays no direct part in the dramatic action of Zarathustra and is never referred to again, there are several points of connec- tion in terms of concepts and vocabulary between this section and Of the SubZime Ones [Von den Erhabenen]. Indeed, the entire chapter functions like a ~ a r a b l e . ~ Yet it is also one of the more disquieting episodes in Zarathustra, as the classical philologist Erwin Rohde (1 845-1 898) instantly recognized when Nietzsche sent him a copy of the text. Replying to thank him, Rohde expressed reservations about this chapter:

Your language too has now struck its richest tones: in this respect I consider the ‘Prologue’, but also some of the later sections, superb. Not all: for in some the figuration of a ghostly abstract representation, taken not from life but as if brought from some unworldly barren waste, makes me feel embarrassed, especi- ally in the Pule Criminal [Auch Deine Sprache findet nun erst ihre vollsten Klange: ich finde besonders die ‘Vorrede’, aber auch von den spateren Abschnit- ten manche, darin unubertrefflich. Nicht alle: denn in einigen wird mir die Durchfigurierung einer nicht aus dem Leben genommenen, sondern wie aus weltfremden Einoden mitgebrachten, gespensterhaft abstrakten Vorstellung peinlich: besonders in dem bleichen V~rbrecher].~

In its opening paragraph - ‘Behold, the Pale Criminal has bowed his neck: from his eye speaks the great contempt’ [Seht, der bleiche Verbrecher hat genickt: aus seinem Auge redet die groDe Verachtung] - “Of the Pale Crimi- nal” recalls Zarathustra’s great declamation in his opening prologue: ‘What is the greatest thing you can experience? It is the hour of the great contempt. The hour in which even your happiness grows loathsome to you, and your reason and your virtue also’ [Was ist das GroDte, das ihr erleben konnt? Das ist die Stunde der grol3en Verachtung. Die Stunde, in der euch auch euer Gliick zum Eke1 wird und ebenso eure Vernunft und eure Tugend] (43).6 And the themes of contempt, reason and virtue are all tackled in this chapter. In particular, “Of the Pale Criminal” expresses a contempt for justice or, rather, a certain kind of justice, involving a critique not just of the criminal but also of the judges who would condemn him. As Leo Strauss argued in his seminar on Zarathustra, held in Chicago in 1959, this chapter attacks the judges, whilst suggesting that the ‘inseparable connection’ between Good and Evil

426 Paul Bishop

renders condemnation imp~ssible.~ Furthermore, as Strauss suggests, this chapter brings out two important distinctions for Nietzsche. First, there is the distinction between the (rational) Ego and the (non-rational) Self, as that was set out in the earlier chapter entitled “On the Despisers of the Body” [ Von den Veruchtern des Leibes]. Second, there is the distinction between the conscious intention and the unconscious motive. That these two points be- long to the same thematic problem in Zavuthustra becomes clear from the remark of one of Strauss’s disciples, Laurence Lampert, who has argued: ‘Zarathustra continues to demonstrate himself to be a psychologist who understands the soul because he understands the body’ (p.43). And in this chapter, Zarathustra’s knowledge of the body - which is promoted in Nietzsche’s thought to an importance it had previously enjoyed only in Schopenhauer - reveals itself, in the words of Lampert, to be ‘capable of unriddling the secrets of even the most unhealthy exception’ (ibid.).

The opening attack on the judges, who treat the criminal like an animal, recalls Nietzsche’s concern elsewhere with issues of justice.8 Nodding like the beast ready for slaughter, the Pale Criminal’s expression of contempt ~

‘My Ego is something that should be overcome’ [Mein Ich ist etwas, das iiberwunden werden soll] - ironically recapitulates another central message of Zarathustra’s opening prologue: ‘Man is something that must be over- come’ [Der Mensch ist etwas, das uberwunden werden soll] (53). Yet Zara- thustra says that it is the condemnation of the criminal by himself, not by the judges, which constitutes his highest moment and makes him sublime.’

Who or what is the Pale Criminal? And why is he pale? Zarathustra’s explanation includes the following difficult lines:

But the thought is one thing, the deed is another, and another yet is the image of the deed. The wheel of causality does not roll between them.

An image made this man pale. He was equal to his deed when he did it: but he could not endure its image after it was done.

[Aber ein anderes ist der Gedanke, ein anderes die Tat, ein anderes das Bild der Tat. Das Rad des Grundes rollt nicht zwischen ihncn.

Ein Bild machte diesen bleichen Menschen bleich. Gleichwuchsig war er seiner Tat, als er sie tat: aber ihr Bild ertrug er nicht, als sie getan war.]

To try and understand these lines involves an appreciation of the role played by following key themes in Nietzsche’s thought: morality and memory, re- venge and ressentiment, essence and estrangement. The Pale Criminal is pale

Freud and Jung in Nietzsche’s Zarathustra 427

because, having committed his crime, its image haunts him. But he is haunted above all by what this crime has revealed to him about himself.

From the point of view of the judges who (in both senses of the word) condemn the criminal, he has committed a double crime - murder and rob- bery: ‘Thus says the scarlet judge: “Why did this criminal murder? He wanted to steal.”’ [So spricht der rote Richter: “Was mordete doch dieser Verbrecher? Er wollte rauben”]. But Zarathustra wants to explore the psychology of the crime in more detail: ‘But I tell you: his soul wanted blood not booty: he thirsted for the joy of the knife!’ [Aber ich sage euch: seine Seele wollte Blut, nicht Raub: er diirstete nach dem Gluck des Messers!]:

But his simple mind did not understand this madness and it persuaded him otherwise. “What is the good of blood?” it said. “Will you not at least commit a theft too? Take a revenge?”

And he hearkened to his simple mind: its word lay like lead upon him ~ then he robbed as he murdered. He did not want to be ashamed of his madness.

[Seine arme Vernunft aber begriff diesen Wahnsinn nicht und uberredete ihn. “Was liegt an Blut!” sprach sie; “willst du nicht zum mindesten einen Raub dabei machen? Eine Rache nehmen?”

Und er horchte auf seine arme Vernunft: wie Blei lag ihre Rede auf ihm ~ da raubte er, als er mordete. Er wollte sich nicht seines Wahnsinns schiimen.]

Zarathustra discusses the deed of the Pale Criminal in terms of madness: ‘Now for evermore he saw himself as the perpetrator of one deed. I call this madness: in him the exception has become the rule’ [Immer sah er sich nun als einer Tat Tater. Wahnsinn heil3e ich dies: die Ausnahme ver- kehrte sich ihm zum Wesen]. But Zarathustra does not merely banish in- tentionality to the murky realms of pathology. Instead, he analyses the deed by distinguishing between two kinds of madness. First, there is what he calls the madness after the deed: ‘The chalk-line charmed the hen; the blow he struck charmed his simple mind - I call this madness after the deed’ [Der Strich bannt die Henne; der Streich, den er fuhrte, bannte seine arme Vernunft - den Wahnsinn nach der Tat heil3e ich dies].’* The Pale Criminal is pale because he is haunted by the memory - or, as Zarathustra puts it, the image - of the deed. In this deed, as Zarathustra says, his exceptional behaviour turns into his very being or essence (Wesen). Sec- ond, however, there is another madness, which Zarathustra calls the mad- ness before the deed: ‘Listen, you judges! There is another madness as well; and it comes before the deed. Ah, you have not crept deep enough into

428 Paul Bishop ~~~ ~

this soul!’ [Hort, ihr Richter! Einen anderen Wahnsinn gibt es noch: und der ist vor der Tat. Ach, ihr krocht mir nicht tief genug in diese Seele!]. This prior madness is blood-lust, a murderous Urtrieb, blood for the sake of blood. And, as we know from Goethe’s Faust, blood is ‘a very special juice’.” The primitive desire for blood is so shocking and so alien - so estranging - for the Pale Criminal himself that his reason must intervene and persuade him, now that he has murdered, to rob. It is not so much that the Pale Criminal makes a virtue out of his necessity for violence, but that his murderous drive must itself acquire necessity in the form of prag- matic justification. In other words, it must be made rational. Indeed, it is a central part of Nietzsche’s project to understand how reason functions. In the second of the two short poems which constitute the Epilogue Unter Freunden to the first Book of Human, All Too Human. [Menschliches, Allzumenschliches], Nietzsche talks of bringing reason ‘to its senses’ [Wie Vernunft kommt - “zur Vernunft”!]. And as far as Zarathustra is con- cerned, behind reason there lies the Will to Power.

The voice of reason is described as lying like lead (Blei) on his conscience.” Because he did not wish to be ashamed (sich schcmen) of his madness before the deed, he r ~ b b e d . ’ ~ Yet having avoided this shame is precisely what brings guilt (Schuld) upon him and makes him pale. For although he was equal to the murder when he committed it, he proves unequal to the image of it. In other words, he becomes estranged from the memory of it. Or to put it an- other way, it is because the Pale Criminal has a guilt-complex that he suffers from a guilty complexion. He has become, so to speak, beyond the pale. Zarathustra’s talk of madness suggests that the Pale Criminal makes a fit subject for psychiatry, not to say psychoanalysis. Thus it is not surprising that both Freud and Jung were intrigued by the figure of the Pale Criminal, and particularly in those aspects of estrangement from memory which it fore- g r o u n d ~ . ~ ~

Although Freud repeatedly claimed that, in order to avoid being influenced by Nietzsche, he had never read him, it is clear to any reader that he was in fact deeply immersed in Nietzsche. For example, Nietzsche was discussed at the weekly meetings of the Viennese Psychoanalytic Society, and Nietzsche’s On the Genealogy of Morals clearly lies behind much of the thinking in Civil- ization and its Discontents [Das Unbehagen in der Kultur] (1930).15 In ‘Some Character-Types met with in Psychoanalytic Work’ [Uber einige Charakter- typen aus der psychoanalytischen Arbeit],16 first published in Imago in 1916,

Freud and Jung in Nietzsche’s Zarathustra 429

Freud devoted the third part of his paper to those whom he dubbed ‘Crimi- nals from a Sense of Guilt’ [Die Verbrecher aus Schuldbew~Btsein].’~ In the introduction to his paper, Freud suggested that the analyst is concerned to know ‘what course was followed by the mysterious path that has led from the instinctual wishes to the symptoms’ [iiber welche Stationen der geheimnis- volle Weg von jenen Triebwunschen zu diesen Symptomen gefuhrt hat]. Yet, Freud continued, the resistance set up by the patient demands that the ana- lyst pay attention to the patient’s character.

In Criminals from a Sense of Guilt, Freud begins with the clinical obser- vation that many of his patients confess to having committed such crimes as theft, fraud and arson during the age of puberty. Freud explains these crimes in terms of a sense of relief which they bring to the patient. Relief, that is, from a hidden guilt of unknown origins:

Paradoxical as it may sound, I must maintain that the sense of guilt was present before the misdeed, that it did not arise from it, but conversely - the misdeed arose from the sense of guilt. These people might justly be described as crimi- nals from a sense of guilt. The pre-existence of the guilt feeling had of course been demonstrated by a whole set of other manifestations and effects.

[So paradox es klingen mag, ich muB behaupten, daB das SchuldbewuDtsein friiher da war als das Vergehen, daB es nicht aus diesem hervorging, sondern umgekehrt das Vergehen aus dem SchuldbewuBtsein. Diese Personen durfte man mit gutem Recht als Verbrecher aus SchuldbewuDtsein bezeichnen. Die Praexistenz des Schuldgefiihls hatte sich natiirlich durch eine ganze Reihe von anderen AuBerungen und Wirkungen nachweisen lassen.]

In this context, Freud raises the question: what is the origin of ‘this obscure sense of guilt before the deed’ [dieses dunkle Schuldgefiihl vor der Tat]? And he gives us the answer. According to Freud, the conscience of Mankind is an ‘inherited mental force’ [vererbte Seelenmacht] based on ‘the two great crimi- nal intentions’ [die beiden groBen Verbrechen der Menschen] or, in other words, parricide and incest or, to put it yet another way, the Oedipus com- plex. His patients, Freud argued, committed crimes in order to fix their nebu- lous sense of (Oedipal) guilt (before the deed) to a specific object. In his earlier case history of Little Huns (1909) and in his later case history of the Wolf Man (written 1914, published 1918), Freud explored the idea of guilt as a motive for misdeeds in greater detail.18

In the conclusion to his paper, Freud claims to find an anticipation of his theory in what he originally called in 1916 the ‘dark sayings’ [dunkle Reden] of Nietzsche’s Zarathustra:

430 Paul Bishop

A friend has called my attention to the fact that the ‘criminal from a sense of guilt’ was known to Nietzsche too. The pre-existence of the feeling of guilt, and the utilization of a deed in order to rationalize this feeling, glim- mer before us in Zarathustra’s sayings ‘On the Pale Criminal’. Let us leave it to future research to decide how many criminals are to be reckoned among these ‘pale’ ones.

[Ein Freund hat mich dann darauf aufmerksam gemacht, daD der “Verbrecher aus Schuldgefiihl” auch Nietzsche bekannt war. Die Praexistenz des Schuldge- fuhls und die Verwendung der Tat zur Rationalisierung desselben schimmern uns aus den Reden Zarathustras “Uber den bleichen Verbrecher” entgegen. Ub- erlassen wir es zukunftiger Forschung zu entscheiden, wieviele von den Verbre- chern zu diesen “bleichen” zu rechnen sind.]

So Freud is interested in what Zarathustra calls the madness before the deed: the primordial blood-lust - analysed by Freud as the desire to kill the father and hence possess the mother - which induces a sense of Oedipal guilt in his patients before they have committed any specific (and, in a sense, lesser) crime. In other words, crime for these patients is a means of relief from the estranging memory of Oedipal guilt.

There are, however, a couple of problems with Freud’s account. First, de- spite making a distinction in such later works as Civilization and its Discon- tents between guilt (Schuld) and regret (Reue), Freud apparently overlooked Zarathustra’s separation of the two moments of shame and guilt. Second, if the supposed guilt from the Oedipus complex is universal, then why is the crime caused by this sense of guilt not equally universal? These questions remain unanswered by Freud.

By contrast with Freud,19 C. G. Jung was interested in what Zarathustra called the madness after the deed, that is, he was concerned with estrange- ment from the memory of the deed. The specific context of his remarks is his article entitled After the Catastrophe [Nach der K a t a ~ t r o p h e ] . ~ ~ First pub- lished in the Neue Schweizer Rundschau in 1945, it was the second of three papers dealing with the psychopathology of National Socialism from an archetypal perspective.21 In it, Jung used the figure of the Pale Criminal to elaborate his psychological theory of collective guilt. This guilt, however, is one in which Jung, a Swiss, nevertheless felt himself deeply implicated, as is clear from the beginning of his essay: ‘we are, on the whole, much more deeply involved in the recent events in Germany than we like to admit’ [wir sind im allgemeinen vie1 tiefer in das deutsche Geschehen hineingezogen, als wir es wahrhaben wollen]. Further on, Jung admitted:

Freud and Jung in Nietzsche’s Zarathustra 43 1

I must confess that no article has ever given me so much trouble, from a moral as well as a human point of view. I had not realized how much I myself was affected [...I This inner identity or participation mystique with events in Ger- many has caused me to experience afresh how painfully wide is the scope of the psychological concept of collective guilt.

[Ich will es dem Leser nicht verheimlichen: noch nie hat ein Aufsatz mir solche moralische, ja menschliche Miihe gekostet. Ich hatte nicht gewuDt, bis zu welch- em Grad es mich angeht ... Diese innerste Identitat oder “participation mys- tique” mit dem deutschen Geschehen hat mich noch einmal peinlich und schmerzlich die Tragweite des psychologischen Begriffes der Kollektivschuld erleben lassen.]

In After the Catastrophe, Jung drew attention to an alleged ‘inferiority com- plex’ of the Germans [das deutsche Minderwertigkeitsgefuhl]: ‘What did Go- ethe, Heine, and Nietzsche have to say about their country-men?’ [was haben Goethe, Heine und Nietzsche uber ihr eigenes Land g e ~ a g t ? ] . ~ ~ The juxtapo- sition of this remark with an earlier one in the essay gives a clear hint that Jung’s personal affinity with the German psyche may have gone deeper than he had thought. For only a few pages before discussing the inferiority com- plex of the Germans, Jung had declared in his opening paragraphs that he himself approached the problem of German history ‘with an avowed sense of inferiority’ [von der Seite . . . der eingestandenen Unterlegenheit].

Jung compared the German abnegation of responsibility for the National Socialist state and the Second World War to the reaction of the Pale Criminal to his deed:

This spectacle recalls the figure of what Nietzsche so aptly called the ‘Pale Criminal’, who in reality shows all the signs of hysteria. He simply will not and cannot admit that he is what he is; he cannot endure his own guilt, just as he could not help incurring it. He will stoop to every kind of self-decep- tion if only he can escape the sight of himself. It is true that this happens everywhere, but nowhere does it appear to be such a national characteristic as in Germany.

[Dieses Schauspiel erinnert an jene von Nietzsche so trefflich beschriebene Ges- talt des “bleichen Verbrechers”, der in Wirklichkeit alle Merkmale der Hysterie an sich tragt. Er will und kann es nicht wahr haben, daJ3 er so ist, wie er ist; er kann seine Schuld nicht ertragen, wie er es auch nicht lassen konnte, sie zu begehen. Ja, er scheut nicht davor zuriick, durch Selbstbetrug sich den eigenen Anblick zu ersparen. Das geschieht zwar iiberall, aber eben, wie es scheinen will, nirgends so national deutlich wie in Deutschland.]

Jung continued by extending the characteristics of the Pale Criminal, whom

432 Paul Bishop

he diagnosed as hysterical, to the whole German nation, in which he found evidence of a collective hysteria.

On Jung’s account of this condition, hysteria is brought about by the oppo- sitions and tensions within the psyche. As usual for Jung, a psychological condition is understood in terms of the problem of the opposites. Whilst the greater distance between the opposites in the Germans’ psyche is said to account for their amazing energy drive, it is also held responsible for their supposedly fractured personalities and unhappy lives. According to Jung, the psychic splitting into opposites is typical of the German character and, for Jung, finds personified expresson in the quintessentially Teutonic figure of FaustZ3

Here we have the picture of the hysterical state of mind, of Nietzsche’s ‘Pale Criminal’. Fate has confronted every German with his inner counterpart: Faust is face to face with Mephistopheles and can no longer say, ‘So that was the essence of the brute!’ He must confess instead: ‘That was my other side, my alter ego, my all too palpable shadow which can no longer be denied.’24

[Das ist das Bild eines hysterischen Geisteszustandes oder des “bleichen Verbre- chers”, um mit Nietzsche zu reden. Das Schicksal hat den Deutschen mit seinem inneren Gegenspieler konfrontiert. Mephistopheles ist Faust gegenubergetreten, und Faust kann nicht mehr sagen: “Das also war des Pudels Kern”, sondern mu13 zugeben: “Das ist meine Kehrseite, mein alter ego, mein leider allzuwirk- licher, nicht mehr abzuleugnender Schatten.”]

Even if Jung’s reference to the Pale Criminal is apparently less sophisticated than Freud’s, his use of the figure of the Pale Criminal in the context of his discussion of Nazi Germany is by no means unimportant. For before the outbreak of the Second World War, during his Seminar on Zarathustra, held in Zurich from 1934 to 1939, Jung had registered a very strong and extremely negative emotional reaction to the chapter Of the Pale Criminal. On 8 May 1935, Jung declared:

[This chapter] is exceedingly disgusting to my feeling [.,.I Here Nietzsche really beconies an intellectual criminal. That is the disgusting thing - he reaches here one of the pre-stages of his own madness [...I The criminal is only a sort of mirror reflex of the criminal impetus of N i e t ~ s c h e . ~ ~

Within the context of his discussion, it is highly significant that Jung should have chosen to invoke an image which he personally had found so disturbing. For by using the figure of the Pale Criminal in After the Catastrophe, Jung is unconsciously voicing his horror not only at the deeds of the Germans but

Freud and Jung in Nietzsche’s Zarathustra 433

at the ‘shadow-side’ of his own personality as well. In this way, the image of the Pale Criminal functions both to underline the explicit imputation of col- lective guilt to the Germans and to underline Jung’s confession of his own guilt as well. Thus Jung’s analysis of the Germans turns out to be simul- taneously an exercise in self-analysis.

In conclusion, we must remember that the Pale Criminal is not a pleasant figure. Zarathustra describes him as ‘a heap of diseases’ [ein Haufen von Krankheiten] and as ‘a knot of savage serpents’ [ein Knauel wilder Schlang- en]. For those such as the Pale Criminal, Zarathustra believes there can be no ‘redemption’ [Erlosung] except ‘a quick death’ [der schnelle TO^].^^ Yet Zarathustra tells the judges, and hence us: ‘You should say “enemy,” but not “miscreant”; you should say “invalid,” but not “scoundrel”; you should say “fool,” but not “sinner”’ [“Feind” sollt ihr sagen, aber nicht “Bosewicht”; “Kranker” sollt ihr sagen, aber nicht “Schuft”; “Tor” sollt ihr sagen, aber nicht “Sunder”]. In other words, mere moral condemnation is rejected by Zarathustra.

The sufferings and desires of the Pale Criminal’s body are interpreted by his mind as lust for murder and greed for ‘the joy of the knife’ [das Gluck des Messers]. So the Pale Criminal murders and, in order to ration- alize his deed, he robs as well. But what the voice of reason incites the criminal to do - to take revenge (and hence to murder) - is itself repeated in the judges’ sentence of execution: ‘Your killing, you judges, should be a mercy and not a revenge’ [Euer Toten, ihr Richter, sol1 ein Mitleid sein und keine Rachel. Those who would condemn the Pale Criminal on moral grounds and consider themselves virtuous are in turn castigated by Zara- thustra: ‘your good people [...I possess their virtue in order to live long lives and in a miserable ease’ [Eure Guten ... haben ihre Tugend, um lange zu leben, und in einem erbarmlichen Behagen]?’ Compared with the virtu- ous, Zarathustra praises the madness of the Pale Criminal: ‘How I wish they possessed a madness through which they could perish, like this Pale Criminal’ [Wollte ich doch, sie hatten einen Wahnsinn, an dem sie zugrun- de gingen gleich diesem bleichen Verbre~her!].~~

And it is in terms of psychology that Freud and Jung understood the Pale Criminal. Their respective readings point to the differences between psycho- analysis (Freud) and analytical psychology (Jung). On the one hand, Freud is interested in the madness before the deed and in estrangement from the memory of Oedipal guilt. On the other, Jung is interested in the madness

434 Paul Bishop

after the deed and in estrangement from the memory of a crime of excess and sheer violence (the Holocaust). Yet at the same time, their use of the figure of the Pale Criminal points to their common intellectual inheritance, Nietzsche.

NOTES 1. The following editions have been used: Friedrich Nietzsche, Werke, ed. Karl

Schlechta, 3 vols (Munich: Carl Hanser, 1966); Sigmund Freud, Gesammelte Wer- ke, Anna Freud et al., Ed. 18 vols (Frankfurt am Main, 1952-1987); and C.G. Jung, Gesammelte Werke, Lilly Jung-Merker et al., Ed. 20 vols (Zurich and Stuttgart: RascherlOlteii und Freiburg im Breisgau: Walter, 1958-1993). In order to allow the reader to use any edition, references are given by chapter and section number. The following translations have been used: Friedrich Nietzsche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra, trans. R.J. Hollingdale (Harmondsworth, Middlesex: Penguin, 1961); Sigmund Freud, The Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works, James Strachey et al., Ed. 24 vols (London: Hogarth Press, 1953-1974); and C. G. Jung, The Collected Works, Sir Herbert Read et al., Ed. 20 vols (Lon- don: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1953-1979). All other translations are my own. This paper emerged out of intensive discussion with my former postgraduate col- league David Groiser. I am greatly indebted to him and to my colleagues in the Department of German, University of Glasgow, with whom I have been able to discuss further the ideas in this paper.

2. For further discussion of the Pale Criminal, see: Hans Weichelt, Zarathustra-Kom- mentur (Leipzig: Felix Meiner, *1922). pp. 17-20; Timothy Gould, ‘What Makes the Pale Criminal Pale: Nietzsche and the Image of the Deed’, in: Soundings: An Interdisciplinary Journal, vol. 58, no. 4 (Winter, 1985), 510-536; Laurence Lam- pert: Nietzsche’s Teaching: A n Interpretation of Thus Spoke Zarathustra (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1986), pp. 4344; Annemarie Pieper, ‘Ein Seil gekniipft zwischen Mensch und obermensch’: Philosophische Erlauterung- en zu Nietzsches erstem “Zarathustra” (Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta, 1990), pp. 170-182; Greg Whitlock, Returning to Sils Maria: A Commentary to Nietzsche’s “Also sprach Zarathustra” (New York, Bern, Frankfurt am Main and Paris: Peter Lang, 1990), pp. 72-75; Joachim Kohler, Zarathustras Geheimnis: Friedrich Nietzsche und seine verschliisselte Botschaft: Eine Biographie (Reinbek bei Hamburg: Rowohlt, 1992), pp. 441443; Ronald Lehrer, Nietzsche’s Presence in Freud’s Life und Thought: On the Origins of a Psychology of’ Dynamic Unconscious Mental Functioning (Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 1995), pp. 1 4 6 151; and Stanley Rosen, The Mask of Enlightenment: Nietzsche’A “Zurathustra” (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995), pp. 87-99.

3. Hans-Georg Gadamer, “Das Drama Zarathustras,” in: Nietzsche-Studien, 15

4. Compare with the parable of the tree in Of the Tree on the Mountain [ Vom Baum am Berge], or the parable of those who sought to drive out the devil and entered

(1986), 1-15.

Freud and Jung in Nietzsche’s Zarathustra 435

into the swine themselves in Of Chastity [Von der Keuschheit] or the parable of the wanderer who stumbles over a dog in The Leach [Der Blutegel].

5. Letter from Erwin Rohde to Nietzsche of 22 December 1883 (Nietzsche, Briej wechsel. Giorgio Colli and Mazzino Montinari (Eds.), 16 vols (Berlin and New York: Walter de Gruyter, 1975-1984), IW2, pp. 412413.

6. See: ‘I love the great despisers, for they are the great venerators and arrows of longing for the other bank’ [Ich liebe die groBen Verachtenden, weil sie die gro- Ben Verehrenden sind und Pfeile der Sehnsucht nach dem andern Ufer] (Zara- thustra’s Prologue [Zarathustras Vorrede] $4); ‘Behold the good and the just! Whom do they hate most? Him who smashes their tables of values, the breaker, the law-breaker - but he is their creator’ [Sehe die Guten und Gerechten! Wen hassen sie am meisten? Den, der zerbricht ihre Tafeln der Werte, den Brecher, den Verbrecher:- das aber ist der Schaffende] (Zarathustra’s Prologue [Zara- thustras Vorrede] $9); “‘My contempt and my desire increase together; the higher I climb, the more do I despise him who climbs [...I”’ [“Meine Verachtung und meine Sehnsucht wachsen miteinander; je hoher ich steige, um so mehr ver- achte ich den, der steigt [...]”I (Of the Tree on the Mountainside [Vom Baum am Berge]); ‘The lover wants to create, because he despises! What does he know of love who has not had to despise precisely what he loved?’ [Schaffen will der Liebende, weil er verachtet! Was weiB der von Liebe, der nicht gerade verachten muBte, was er liebte!] (Of the Way qf the Creator [ Vom Wege des Schaffenden]); ‘There is still contempt in his eye, and disgust lurks around his mouth’ [Verach- tung ist noch in seinem Auge; und Eke1 birgt sich an seinem Munde] (Of the Sublime Men [Von den Erhabenen]); ‘Lust for power: before its glance Man crawls and bends and toils and becomes lower than the swine or the snake - until at last the cry of the great contempt bursts from him -’ [Herrschsucht: vor deren Blick der Mensch kriecht und duckt und front und niedriger wird als Schlange und Schwein: - bis endlich die groBe Verachtung aus ihm aufschreit -1 (Of the Three Evil Things [Von den drei Bosen]); and ‘0 my soul, I taught you contempt that comes not as the gnawing of a worm, the great, loving contempt which loves most where it despises most’ [0 meine Seele, ich lehrte dich das Verachten, das nicht wie ein WurmfraB kommt, das groBe, liebende Verachten, welches am meisten liebt, so es am meisten verachtet] (Of the Greut Longing [Von der groJen Sehnsucht]). And in his foreword to The Anti-Christ [Der An- tichrist], Nietzsche concluded: ‘One must be superior to Mankind in force, in loftiness of soul - in contempt ....’ [Man muB der Menschheit uberlegen sein durch Kraft, durch Hohe der Seele - durch Verachtung ...I.

7. I am grateful to Professor Laurence Lampert of Indiana University, Indianapolis, for providing me with this information. For further discussion, see Laurence Lam- pert, Leo Strauss and Nietzsche (Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press, 1996).

8. See the section entitled ‘Have the adherents of the theory of free-will the right to punish?’ [Ob die Anhanger der Lehre vom freien Willen strafen durfen] in Human, All-Too-Human [Menschliches, Allzumenschliches], 1112, $23; and the aphorism ‘The criminal is frequently not equal to his deed: he makes it smaller and slanders it’ [Der Verbrecher ist haufig genug seiner Tat nicht gewachsen: er verkleinert und verleumdet sie] in Beyond Good and Evil [Jenseits von Gut und Bose], $109.

9. In Of the Sublime Ones [Von den Erhabenen], Zarathustra links sublimity with

436 Paul Bishop ~

being ‘a penitential in spirit’ [ein BuBer des Geistes]. And in On War and Warriors [ Vom Krieg und Kriegsvolke], he describes the sublime as ‘the mantle for the ugly’ [den Mantel des HaBlichen].

10. The hen and the chalk-line refer to the fact that, due to their cognitive faculties,

11

12

farmyard fowl apparently perceive a line in front of them as a three-dimensional obstacle. As Timothy Gould has pointed out (p. 517), this image similarly occurs in Nietzsche’s analysis of the doctrine of sin in On the Genealogy of Morals [Zur Genealogie der Moral]: ‘He has heard, he has understood, the unfortunate: from now on he is like the hen imprisoned by a chalk line. He can no longer get out of this chalk circle: the sick man has been transformed into the “sinner”’ [Er hat gehort, er hat verstanden, der Ungluckliche: jetzt geht es ihm wie der Henne, um die ein Strich gezogen ist. Er kommt aus diesem Kreis von Strichen nicht wieder heraus: aus dem Kranken ist “der Sunder” gemacht ... ] (111, $20). ‘Blut ist ein ganz besonderer Saft’ (Faust I , 1.1740). Furthermore, blood is an important thematic image in Zarathusfra. In the next chapter, Of Reading and Writing [ Vom Lesen und Schreiben], Zarathustra says: ‘Of all writings I love only that which is written with blood. Write with blood: and you will discover that blood is spirit’ [Von allem Geschriebenen liebe ich nur das, was einer mit seinem Blute schreibt. Schreibe mit Blut: und du wirst erfahren, dalj Blut Geist ist]; yet in Of the Priests [Von den Priestern], Zarathustra says: ‘But blood is the worst witness of truth; blood poisons and transforms the purest teaching to delusion and hatred of the heart’ [Aber Blut ist der schlechteste Zeuge der Wahrheit; Blut vergiftet die reinste Lehre noch zu Wahn und Ha13 der Herzen]. And in Of the Spirit of Gravity [ Vom Geist der Schwere], Zarathustra admits: ‘For I love blood’ [Denn ich liebe Blut]. It may well be that there is a play on words here between ‘Blei’ and ‘bleich’ (just as, earlier on, there was play on the sounds of ‘Strich’ and ‘Streich’). I am grateful to David Groiser for bringing this to my attention and for his other helpful com- ments on the interpretation of this chapter in Zarathustra.

13. The distinction between ‘shame culture’ and ‘guilt culture’, introduced into an- thropological discourse by Ruth Benedict (see her The Chrysanthemum and the Sword (1946)), has its roots in Nietzsche’s writings on morality.

14. Fur further psychoanalytic interest in criminality, see Franz Alexander and Hugo Staub, Der Verbrecher und seine Richter (Vienna: Internationaler Psychoanaly- tischer Verlag, 1929). In De la psychose paranoiaque dans ses rapports avec la personnalit.4 (1932), Lacan suggested that the psychosis of a patient called Aimee fell into the category of ‘self-punishment paranoia’ (paranoi’a d’autopunition), a term derived from Freud’s ‘criminals from a sense of guilt’ (see Bice Benvenuto and Roger Kennedy, The Works of Jacques Lacan: An Introduction (London: Free Association Books, 1986), p. 43; and Jacques Lacan, De la psychose paranofaque dans ses rapports avec lapersonnalit.4 (Paris: Editions du Seuil, 1975). In an article published in the Sunday Referee on 11 December 1932, Jung attempted to offer an insight into “Crime and the Soul” (see also “Blick in die Verbrecherseele”, published in the Wiener Journal on 15 January 1933) (The Collected Works, XVIII, pp. 343%346/Gesammrnefte Werke, XVIIVi, pp. 371-374). For a more gen- eral discussion, see Richard J. Evans, Tales from the German Underworld: Crime and Punishment in the Nineteenth Century (New Haven and London: Yale Univer- sity Press, 1998).

Freud and Jung in Nietzsche’s Zarathustra 437

15. For further discussion and references, see Lehrer (note 2); and Reinhard Gasser, Nietzsche und Freud (Berlin and New York: Walter de Gruyter, 1997).

16. Typology was to become of central importance to Jungian theory, and Jung’s first major work after his break with Freud was called Psychological Types [Psychologi- sche Typen] (1921).

17. Freud, Gesammelte Werke, X, pp. 363-391lThe Standard Edition of the Collected Works, XIV, pp. 309-333.

18. See Analysis of a Phobia in a Five- Year-Old Boy [Analyse der Phobie eines funfiah- rigen Knaben] (1909) and From the History of an Infantile Neurosis [Aus der Ge- schichte einer infantifen Neurose] ([I9141 1918).

19. For an analysis of Jung’s use of Nietzsche, see Paul Bishop, The Dionysian SeF C.G. Jung’s Reception of Friedrich Nietzsche (Berlin and New York: Walter de Gruyter, 1995).

20. Jung, Gesammelte Werke, X, pp. 219-2441The Collected Works, X, pp. 194-217. 21. See Wotan (1936) and The Fight with the Shadow [Der Kampf mit dem Schatten]

(first broadcast on the BBC Third Programme in 1946). 22. Dislike of the homeland is a common topos in German literature and thought.

At the end of Holderlin’s Hyperion (1797-1799), Hyperion says: ‘I can think of no people more dissociated than the Germans’ [Ich kann mir kein Volk denken, das zerriDner ware, wie die Deutschen] (Friedrich Holderlin, Werke. Emil Staiger, (Ed.), 2 vols (Zurich: Atlantis, 1944), 11, p. 164. Like Holderlin, Winckelmann in: Thoughts on the Imitation of Greek Works in Painting and Sculpture [Gedanken iiber die Nachahmung der griechischen Werke in der Malerei und Bildhauerkunst (1755), Herder in: On the Knowing and Sensing of the Human Soul [Vom Erkennen und Empfinden der menschlichen Seele] (1778), Wilhelm von Humboldt in On the Study of Antiquity, Especially That of the Greeks [Uber das Studium des Altertums, und des griechischen insbesondere] (1793) and Schiller in his On the Aesthetic Education of Man in a Series of Letters [Uber die asthetische Erziehung des Menschen in einer Reihe von Briefen] (1795) all looked to the Greeks for a wholeness they perceived had been lost in modern Man.

23. For further discussion of the notion of ‘Faustian’ culture, see Hans Schwerte, Faust und das Faustische: Ein Kapitel deutscher Ideologie (Stuttgart: Klett, 1962), esp. pp. 332-333.

24. See Faust’s exclamation when he realizes that the black dog he has found is in fact Mephistopheles in disguise (Faust I , 1.1323).

25. C. G. Jung, Nietzsche’s “Zarathustra”: Notes of the Seminar given in 1934-1939. James Jarrett, (Ed.), 2 vols (London: Routledge, 1989), I, pp. 459 and 468.

26. Cf. Zarathustra’s remark in Of Voluntary Death [vom freien Tode]: ‘I wish preachers of speedy death would come!’ [Mochten Prediger kommen des schnellen Todes !] .

27. Cf. ‘But tell me, my brothers: What does your body say about your soul? Is your soul not poverty and dirt and a miserable ease?’ [Aber auch ihr noch, meine Briid- er? sprecht mir: was kiindet euer Leib von ewer Seele? 1st eure Seele nicht Armut und Schmutz und ein erbarmliches Behagen?] (Zarathustra’s Prologue [Zarathus- tras Vorrede] $3); and ‘Overcome, you Higher Men, the petty virtues, the petty prudences, the sand-grain discretion, the ant-swarm inanity, miserable ease, the “happiness of the greatest number”!’ [Ubenvindet mir, ihr hoheren Menschen, die kleinen Tugenden, die kleinen Klugheiten, die Sandkorn-Riicksichten, den Amei-

438 Paul Bishop

sen-Kribbelkram, das erbarmliche Behagen, das “Gliick der meisten”-!] (Of the Higher Men [ Vom hoheren Menschen] $3).

28. In his Prologue [Vorrede], Zarathustra says: ‘I love him who justifies the men of the future and redeems the men of the past: for he wants to perish by the men of the present’ [Ich liebe den, welcher die Zukunftigen rechtfertigt und die Vergangen- en erlost: denn er will an den Gegenwiirtigen zugrunde gehen] ($4). As Julian Roberts has pointed out, ‘zugrunde gehen’ means, on the one hand, ‘to go (the) ground (of Being’) and, on the other, ‘to perish’ (German Philosophy: An Introduc- tion (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1988), p. 231.

Paul Bishop. Born 1967. Ph.D. (Oxford). Senior Lecturer in German, University of Glasgow. Has published: The Dionysian Sep C. G. Jung’s Reception of Friedrich Nietz- sche, 1995; “Literarische Beziehungen haben nie bestanden”? Thomas Mann and C. G. Jung in: Oxford German Studies, 23 (1994); “Uber die Rolle des Asthetischen in der Tiefenpsychologie: Zur Schillerrezeption in der analytischen Psychologie C. G. Jungs” in: Jahrbuch der Deutschen Schillergesellschaft, 42 (1 998); “Epistemological Problems and Aesthetic Solutions in Goethe and Jung”, in: Goethe Yearbook, 9.