Abstract

This article argues that both Zhuangzi and Nietzsche’s aestheticism is a means of overcoming their tragic vision of life. Nietzsche’s aesthetic state of Dionysian intoxication and Zhuangzi’s floating/wandering (游) involve similar, rapturous self-loss in merging with a primal unity or ground being of existence. Both seek an aestheticised, spiritual freedom that is built on an alienation from their perceived reality. Both versions of aestheticism have their price: the penalty of Zagreus in Dionysus, and the sacrifice of historical time and historical self in Zhuangzi’s thought. Beneath their aestheticised vision of primal unity, both are torn by tragic conflicts and sacrifice. Of Zhuangzi, we could say the same as Nietzsche said of the Greeks in his The Birth of Tragedy: ‘this is the real meaning of the famous Greek serenity, so often misrepresented as some kind of untroubled cheerfulness’.

中文翻译：

---

庄子与尼采悲剧视野与审美主义比较研究。

摘要

本文认为，庄子和尼采的唯美主义都是克服他们悲剧性人生观的一种手段。尼采的酒神醉人的美学状态和庄子的漂泊/游荡，在与原始的统一体或存在的地面融为一体时，都具有相似的，狂喜的自我损失。两者都寻求一种审美上的，精神上的自由，这种自由建立在与他们所感知的现实的疏离之上。两种形式的唯美主义都有其代价：萨格勒乌斯在《狄俄尼索斯》中的惩罚，以及庄子思想中历史时间和历史自我的牺牲。在他们对原始统一的审美观之下，两者都被悲剧性的冲突和牺牲所撕裂。关于庄子，我们可以说与尼采在《悲剧的诞生》中谈到希腊人时所说的一样。：“这是著名的希腊宁静的真正含义，因此常常被误称为某种毫无问题的快乐”。