悲劇的誕生The Birth Of Tragedy 第141 歌樂悲劇的塑造
Thus we use the experiences of the truly aesthetic listener to bring to mind the tragic artist himself as he creates his figures like a fecund divinity of individuation (so his workcan hardly be understood as an "imitation of nature") and as his vast Dionysian impulse then devours his entire world of phenomena, in order to let us sense beyond it, and through its destruction, the highest artistic primal joy, in the bosom of the primordially One.
Of course our aestheticians have nothing to say about this return to the primordial home, or the fraternal union of the two art-deities, nor of the excitement of the hearer which isApollinian as well as Dionysian; but they never tire of characterizing the struggle of the hero with fate, the triumph of the moral world order, or the purgation of the emotions through tragedy, as the essence of the tragic.
當然，關於夢神和酒神親如兄弟的關係，他們如何重返故鄉，以及觀衆的夢境的或醉境的興奮，我們的美學家不能撰一詞，可是他們卻不厭其煩地縷述英雄與命運的鬥爭，道德世界的秩序之勝利，悲劇所起的感情淨化作用，而視之爲真正的悲壯。And their indefatigability makes me think that perhaps they are not aesthetically sensitive at all, but react merely as moral beings when listening to a tragedy.
這種老生常談，使我想到他們可能是毫無美感的人，他們在聽悲劇時，堪稱爲衛道之士。
Never since Aristotle has an explanation of the tragic effect been offered from which aesthetic states or an aesthetic activity of the listener could be inferred.
自亞里士多德以來，從沒有人提出一種關於悲劇效果的解釋，根據藝術實況，根據審美活動，以推斷觀衆的心理。Now the serious events suare supposed to prompt pity and fear to discharge themselves in a way that relieves us; now we are supposed to feel elevated and inspired by the triumph of good and noble principles, at the sacrifice of the hero in the interest of a moral vision of the universe.
有時，人們認爲“憐憫與恐懼”是莊嚴劇情所促使的，減輕痛苦的感情渲泄；有時，認爲我們看到良善高尚的道義的勝利，看到英雄爲道德的世界觀而犧牲，便感到揚舉和興奮。I am sure that for countless men precisely this, and only this, is the effect of tragedy, but it plainly follows that all these men, together with their interpreting aestheticians, have had no experience of tragedy as a supreme art.
固然，我深信，對於大多數人，悲劇的效果正是這點，而且僅僅是這點；但是，由此可見，這些人，連同對他們解釋的美學家，並沒有把悲劇作爲最高的藝術來欣賞。The pathological discharge, the catharsis of Aristotle, of which philologists are not sure whether it should be included among medical or moral phenomena, recalls a remarkable notion of Goethe's. "
所謂病理的渲泄，亞里斯多德的catharsis－，——語文學家不知應該把它歸入醫學的，還是道德的現象，——使人想起歌德那有名的猜斷。Without a lively pathological interest," he says, "I, too, have never yet succeeded in elaborating a tragic situation of any kind, and hence I have rather avoided than sought it. Can it perhaps have been yet another merit of the ancients that the deepest pathos was with them merely aesthetic play, while with us the truth of nature must cooperate in order toproduce such a work?"
他說：“我對於病理學不大感興趣，我也從未成功地寫出任何一種悲劇場面，所以我與其探討，毋寧避免這個問題。也許這是古代人的另一優點吧：在他們最高的感染力不過是一種審美的遊戲；在我們，就必須藉助於逼真的描寫，始能產生這樣的作品？”We can now answer this profound final question in the affirmative after our glorious experiences, having found to our astonishment that the deepest pathos can indeed be merely aesthetic play in the case of musical tragedy.
就歌樂悲劇而論，我們往往發現最深的感染力其實只是審美的遊戲。Therefore we are justified in believing that now for the first time the primal phenomenon of the tragic can be described with some degree of success. Anyone who still persists in talking only of those vicarious effects proceeding from extra-aesthetic spheres, and who does not feel that he is above the pathological-moral process, should despair of his aesthetic nature: should we recommend to him as an innocent equivalent the interpretation of Shakespeare after the manner of Gervinus and the diligent search for poetic justice?
現在根據我們這輝煌的經驗，就可以肯定歌德的意味深長的問題，現在根據我們這輝煌的經驗，就可以肯定歌德的意味深長的問題，所以我們頗有理由相信：現在我們可以初步成功地描述悲劇的原始現象。現在，如果還有人總是高談那些在美感領域以外的代替的效果，覺得自己不能超過病理學道德學的解釋，他定必對自己的審美能力感到失望；那末，我們就勸告他依照格爾維諾斯（Gerinus）的方法解釋莎士比亞，努力去探討詩的正義，這是無傷大雅的。
