‎[NIETZSCHE]. CHAIX-RUY, J.‎
‎Nietzsche.‎

‎De Laertii Diogenis fontibus. I-VI. [Extract from: Rheinishes Museum für Philologie, Vol. XXIII + XXIV. Herausgegeben von F.G. Welcker und F. Ritschl]. - [NIETZSCHE'S FOURTH PUBLICATION]‎

‎Frankfurt am Main, Verlag von Johann David Sauerländer, 1868-69. 8vo. Bound with the general title-pages to both volumes of Rheinishes Museum in a very nice recent marbled paper binding with gilt leather title-label to front board. (Vol. XXIII:) pp. (632) - 653 + (Vol. XXIV:) pp. (181) - 228. The paper is extremely brittle and cracks very easily, thus there are a few smaller marginal tears, no loss of lettering and occassional marginal chipping, far from affecting text.‎

‎The scarce first printing of Nietzsche's fourth publication, the third of his philological essays and his most comprehensive, dealing with the question of the sources for Diogenes' work ""The Lives of the Philosophers"", Nietzsche's main interest at the time and the question that took up most of his philological research. It is in this work that Nietzsche concludes that Diogenes had two sources, namely Diocles of Magnesia and Favorinus of Arles.Nietzsche's first published work was a philological essay published in 1867 in the respected journal of classical studies, the ""Rheinisches Museaum für Philologie"". That article, published on the urging of his teacher, appeared when Nietzsche had merely been studying philology for a couple of years. Nietzsche began studying philology at the University of Bonn in the winter semester of 1864/65 and quickly became a prize student. His university studies were fairly quickly interrupted, though, as he spent a year in the Prussian Artillary, from October 1867. After about half a year, he was seriously injured and had to spend the last five months there as a reconvalescent. Nonetheless this year did not mean a break in Nietzsche's studies, quite the contrary. Already in April 1868, before his injury (in May), he published his first book review, namely that of Schoemann's work on ""Die hesiodische Theogonie"", which had just appeared. And after the injury, he naturally had even more time for studying at his disposal"" ""Nietzsche's protracted recovery from his military injuries allowed him considerable time to study and to take on other scholarly duties...(Schaberg, p. 10).""By September of 1868, Nietzsche's studies had produced the first half of a two-part, entitled ""On the Sources of Diogenes Laertius"" (""De Laertii Diogenis fontibus""), which was published in Ritschl's journal. Diogenes Laertius, the third-century author of Lives of the Philosophers, and the question of his sources was Nietzsche's main ongoing interest and the topic represented well over half of his philological publications. Ritschl had been aware of this interest, and he actually encouraged the writing of the article by his most brilliant pupil by designing a school competition with ""The Sources of Diogenes Laertius"" as the recommended topic. Nietzsche, who had been working hard on these studies for several years, won the competition easily."" (Schaberg, p.11)De Laertii Diogenis fontibus was published the year Nietzsche finished his studies and meet Richard Wagner for the first time. The following year, in 1869, Nietzsche intensive studies bore fruit and he was appointed professor of classical philology at the University of Basel. To this day, Nietzsche is still among the youngest of the tenured Classics professors on record. Nietzsche's interest in classical studies did however not last and ""By early January of 1871, Nietzsche was sufficiently disillusioned with philology to apply for the chair of philosophy at Basel, proposing his friend Rhode for his own position. The request was denied but the refusal did little to delay the end of Nietzsche's classical career."" (Schaberg 14 pp). ""[I]t is uncertain whether all of these articles [i.e. in the Rheinisches Museum] were issued individually and there is no evidence in Nietzsche's letters to suggest the standard offprint policies of Rheinisches Museum at the time."" (Schaberg, p. 13). Schaberg 11 - 12‎

‎Götzen-Dämmerung oder Wie man mit dem Hammer philosophirt. Von Friedrich Nietzsche. Leipzig, Verlag von C.G. Naumann, 1889. - (Bound with:) NIETZSCHE, F. Der Fall Wagner. Ein Musikanten-Problem. Von Friedrich Nietzsche. Zweite Auflage.‎

‎Leipzig, Verlag von C.G. Naumann, (1888.) Two works in one volume. (8), 144 pp.; (8), 57, (1) pp. 8vo. Contemporary half cloth, spine lettered gilt, marbled boards, corners. First work: Schaberg 56. First edition of the "Twilight of the Gods" and written during an incredibly productive six month period before Nietzsche's collapse in Turin. It was also the last book published during his lifetime. The title refers to an image in the preface: idols "are touched with a hammer and a tuning fork to determine whether they are hollow", which is of course a sarcastic allusion to Wagner, both personally and as a symbol of the German spirit. Nietzsche had 1,000 copies of this work privately printed. Originally to be called "A Psychologist at Leisure," Nietzsche changed the title at the suggestion of his friend, Gast and the book was released a few weeks after Nietzsche collapsed in Turin. The "Idols" that Nietzsche singles out here are those of the philosophers and the moralists. The Preface clearly states that the work at hand is to be "the revaluation of all values". Socrates and Christianity are particular targets although modern Germany and other contemporary ideas are also taken to task in the normally acerbic style of the author. (This book also contains some of Nietzsche's most frequently quoted phrases beginning with Aphorism #8: "What does not kill me only makes me stronger".)Second work: Schaberg 54.First edition, second issue. The book was published on 22 September 1888. Five hundred copies were printed, but 500 additional copies were printed at this time and falsely marked as second edition by the addition of "Zweite Auflage" in the middle of the ornamental rule and the deletion of the publication date. The true second edition of a 1000 copies was printed in October of 1891.The book is a critique of Richard Wagner and the announcement of Nietzsche's rupture with the German artist, who had involved himself too much, in Nietzsche's eyes, in the Völkisch movement and antisemitism. His music is no longer represented as a possible "philosophical affect," and Wagner is ironically compared to Georges Bizet. However, Wagner is presented by Nietzsche as only a particular symptom of a broader "disease" which is affecting Europe, that is nihilism. The book shows Nietzsche as a capable music-critic, and provides the setting for some of his further reflections on the nature of art and on its relationship to the future health of humanity.This work is in sharp contrast with the second part of Nietzsche's The Birth of Tragedy, wherein he praised Wagner as fulfilling a need in music to go beyond the analytic and dispassionate understanding of music. Nietzsche also praised Wagner effusively in his essay 'Wagner at Bayreuth' (part of the Untimely Meditations), but his disillusion with Wagner the composer and the man was first seen in his 1878 work Human, All Too Human. One of the last works that Nietzsche wrote returned to the critical theme of The Case of Wagner. In Nietzsche contra Wagner, Nietzsche pulled together excerpts from his works to show that he consistently had the same thoughts about music, only that he had misapplied them to Wagner in the earliest works. - First and last leaves a bit foxed, some scattered annotations in blue pencil and lead pencil.Provenance: from the library of A. Diepenbrock, with his signature on the first free endpaper (and date Jan. 1889) and second title-page (with the date Sept. 1888.) Alphons Diepenbrock was a Dutch composer, essayist and classicist. Although he showed musical ability he studied classics at the University of Amsterdam, gaining his doctorate cum laude in 1888 with a dissertation in Latin on the life of Seneca. The same year he became a teacher, a job which he held until 1894, when he retired from that position and decided to devote himself to music. As a composer, he had been completely self-taught from an early age. He created a musical idiom which, in a highly personal manner, combined 16th-century polyphony with Wagnerian chromaticism, to which in later years was added the impressionistic refinement that he encountered in Debussy's music. His predominantly vocal output is distinguished by the high quality of the texts used. Apart from the Ancient Greek dramatists and Latin liturgy, he was inspired by, among others, Goethe, Novalis, Vondel, Brentano, Hölderlin, Heine, Nietzsche, Baudelaire and Verlaine. As a conductor, he performed many contemporary works, including Gustav Mahler's Fourth Symphony (at the Concertgebouw) as well as works by Fauré and Debussy. Throughout his life, Diepenbrock continued his interests in the wider cultural sphere, remaining a classics tutor and publishing works on literature, painting, politics, philosophy and religion. Indeed during his lifetime his musical skills were often overlooked. Nonetheless, Diepenbrock was very much a respected figure within musical circles. He counted amongst his friends Mahler, Richard Strauss and Arnold Schoenberg. ‎

‎Sur Nietzsche. Volonté de chance‎

‎In-12 (186 × 118 mm) de 284-[4] pp. ; broché, couverture imprimée.‎

‎Édition originale. Exemplaire du service de presse sur papier d’édition. Précieux volume offert par l’auteur à Sylvia Bataille et à Jacques Lacan. Il porte cet envoi de Georges Bataille à l’encre bleue sur le faux-titre : à Sylvia et à Jacques affectueusement Georges Après avoir épousé l’auteur d’Histoire de l’œil en 1928, Sylvia Bataille partagea la vie de Jacques Lacan de 1938 jusqu’à la mort de ce dernier en 1981. Bataille gardera de bonnes relations avec son ex-épouse, et fut très proche de Lacan dans les années 1940. Sur le cercle intellectuel de Georges Bataille à cette époque, fréquenté entre autres par Jacques Lacan, Michel Leiris, Jean-Paul Sartre et Simone de Beauvoir, voir Élisabeth Roudinesco. Sur Nietzsche est un des livres fondamentaux de Bataille, peut-être même la clef de tous les autres. «Si toute la pensée athéologique repose en effet tout entière sur la notion de système, elle en est en même temps l’excès. Des textes comme Madame Edwarda, Le Mort, Le Petit représentent sans conteste cet excès. Le Coupable, L’Expérience intérieure, d’une certaine façon aussi. Bataille ne les a-t-il pas sciemment expurgés de ce qui justifiait cet excès à en ruiner le système ? Mais le système existe, et Sur Nietzsche, le dernier des grands livres de cette somme, le met à nu... » (Michel Surya) «À peu d’exceptions près, ma compagnie sur terre est celle de Nietzsche...», a écrit Bataille, et aussi : « Je suis le seul à me donner, non comme un glossateur de Nietzsche, mais comme étant le même que lui.» Benoît Goetz s’est interrogé sur cette «mêmeté» de Nietzsche et de Bataille, «qui n’est pas identité, dont l’origine n’est pas d’ordre mimétique... Ou si identité il y a, elle est peut-être du même ordre que celle dont parlait Deleuze : “la grande identité” de Spinoza et de Nietzsche ». Cette « mêmeté », poursuit-il, « n’est pas sans rapport avec ce que Nietzsche a nommé “éternel retour du même”, et qui n’a rien à voir, comme Deleuze l’a bien souligné, avec la très vieille hypothèse de cycles cosmiques répétitifs. À travers la répétition tout change et varie. Bataille n’est donc pas un clone de Nietzsche, qui ne réclamait ni disciples ni épigones, mais un écho. Bataille fait écho à Nietzsche. On peut nommer ce phénomène “parodie”, même si le mot n’est plus à la mode. Cela signifie qu’une pensée et une écriture, un mode de vie, un ethos glissent le long d’autres textes et d’autres pensées, au point de les épouser, comme un anneau un autre anneau, mais sans confusion aucune. Noces contre nature, celles de la guêpe et de l’orchidée. Mélodie éternelle qui se chante elle-même.» Le saut nietzschéen dont il faut faire l’expérience, consisterait, pour Bataille, «à mordre la tête du serpent de l’esprit de vengeance (pour reprendre l’image du Zarathoustra), et à se débarrasser du ressentiment contre le temps et le “il était”. C’est le fond sans fond de la pensée du retour. [...] Comme Nietzsche, Bataille est un penseur du plus grand sérieux qui se renverse en jeu et en danse. » La pensée de Nietzsche, saisie à travers le prisme de l’œuvre de Bataille, « est por- teuse d’une affirmation qui n’est affirmation que de l’affirmation, et non d’une doctrine particulière. La “doctrine” de l’éternel retour est sans contenu, à la différence, sans doute, de la doctrine de la volonté de puissance. Pour parler comme Heidegger, cette dernière énonce quelque chose concernant l’être de l’étant. La “doctrine” de l’éternel retour, la “grande pensée” n’énonce rien de tel. Elle est l’affirmation d’une manière d’être, d’une manière de l’être lui-même, qui ne comporte rien de fixe, donc rien d’étant et qui par conséquent nous emporte nous-même...» Comme l’écrit Nietzsche dans Le Gai savoir, « L’impérieux jeu du monde / mêle l’être et l’apparence / L’éternelle extravagance / Nous y mêle pêle-mêle. » (trad. de Pierre Klossowski). Marges un peu jaunies, infimes traces d’usure à la couverture. Provenance : Sylvia Maklès (1908-1993) et Jacques Lacan (1901-1981), puis par descendance. – Sotheby’s, cat. Livres et manuscrits, 15 décembre 2020, lot 86. Références : Élisabeth Roudinesco, Jacques Lacan, Paris, Fayard,1993, pp.172-229, passim.– Michel Surya, Georges Bataille, la mort à l’œuvre, Paris, Gallimard, 1992 (rééd. 2012), p. 390, passim. – Benoît Goetz, « Éternel retour de Nietzsche », in Le Portique, revue de philosophie et de sciences humaines, no 29, 2012 (en ligne).‎

‎Nietzsche. L'homme et le monde selon Nietzsche ; confrontations ; expériences et concepts. Cahiers de ROYAUMONT.‎

‎Paris, éd. de Minuit 1967. Bel exemplaire broché, in-8, 289 pages avec table.‎

‎Et aussi : F. NIETZSCHE, Paul RÉE, Lou von SALOMÉ. Correspondance par E. PFEIFFER. CHF 50.00 Les précurseurs de Nietzsche par Ch. ANDLER. Nietzsche, sa vie et sa pensée. 1938. CHF 40.00 Nietzsche en Italie par G. de Pourtalès. 1929. Bel exemplaire broché, in-8, 228 pages. CHF 25.00 Politique de Nietzsche présentée par R.-J. Dupuy. 1969. Bel ex. br., in-8, 350 p. CHF 20.00 Le cas Nietzsche par K. Schlechta. 1960. Bel ex. br., in-8, 167 pages. 25.00 en lisant Nietzsche par E. Faguet. 1903. Bel ex. relié, pet. in-8, 362 p. CHF 40.00‎

‎Beiträge zur Kritik der griechischen Lyriker. [Extract from: Rheinishes Museum für Philologie, Vol. XXIII. Herausgegeben von F.G. Welcker und F. Ritschl]. - [NIETZSCHE'S THIRD PUBLICATION]‎

‎(Frankfurt am Main, Verlag von Johann David Sauerländer, 1868). 8vo. Bound in a very nice recent marbled paper binding with gilt leather title-label to front board. Pp. 479 - 489. The paper is extremely brittle and cracks very easily, thus a few smaller marginal pieces of paper have chipped off, no loss of lettering. One small piece with a few letters is chipped off, but the piece is present and no part of lettering is missing.‎

‎The scarce first printing of Nietzsche's third publication, the second of his philological essays. Nietzsche's first published work was a philological essay published in 1867 in the respected journal of classical studies, the ""Rheinisches Museaum für Philologie"". That article, published on the urging of his teacher, appeared when Nietzsche had merely been studying philology for a couple of years. Nietzsche began studying philology at the University of Bonn in the winter semester of 1864/65 and quickly became a prize student. His university studies were fairly quickly interrupted, though, as he spent a year in the Prussian Artillary, from October 1867. After about half a year, he was seriously injured and had to spend the last five months there as a reconvalescent. ""In the same month he was injured, Nietzsche's second philological essay, ""Contribution Towards a Critique of the Greek Lyric Poets""[ Beiträge zur Kritik der griechischen Lyriker], was published in the ""Rheinisches Museum"". The essay examined the text, verse structure, and meter of Simonides' ""Greek Lament"" in an attempt to restore it to the poet's original meaning and intent. ""[I]t is uncertain whether all of these articles [i.e. in the Rheinisches Museum] were issued individually and there is no evidence in Nietzsche's letters to suggest the standard offprint policies of Rheinisches Museum at the time."" (Schaberg, p. 13). Schaberg 10‎