Eternal recurrence and the Superman in Nietzsche's philosophy

Eternal Recurrence in the Unbearable Lightness of Being

Nietzsche's philosophy of eternal recurrence is most clearly explicated in Thus Spake Zarathustra and The Gay Science. While some of his other works revisit this theory, the student of eternal recurrence would do best to examine these works first. The theory is interesting because of its many possibilities of interpretation. At its basis, eternal recurrence holds that each person eternally lives the same life over and over. After death, what Zarathustra refers to as "the hourglass" is turned over to start again. The soul is once again alive in the same body, to repeat the same life and the same decisions for all eternity.

Zarathustra approaches this idea from his "Superman" concept. The Superman is the person who has developed the will to power to achieve complete self-mastery. Being master over himself, the Superman can control himself perfectly. He revels in this power and experiences life according to the joy it brings. For Zarathustra, this should bring perfect joy. The will to power is Nietzsche's answer to the concept of fear, which he understands as a lack of power. In order to counter this, the will to power can be developed as a motivator for human action. This will to power also counteracts the nihilism that could develop as a result of the eternal recurrence principle and as a result of fear.

The joy of the Superman is perfect, as it means perfect mastery over the self and the world. Because of this joy, the Superman also revels in the beauty and joy of life itself, thus inviting and enjoying the eternal recurrence of his current life. Specifically, Nietzsche's theory of eternal recurrence, the elements of each life survive to such an extent that it will be gathered together once more to create the same person and the same life. This is eternal recurrence.

It is worth noting that Zarathustra explicates this principle first with the certainty and joy of the Superman, but then also with the horror and fear of the powerless. When addressing the principle first, Zarathustra uses joyous phrases and terms to convey his ideas. He focuses on the joys of the instant moment. It infuses him with happiness and with the desire for everything to return. All joy, in the philosopher's words, wants eternity. Its drive is towards everlasting life.

This idea of perfection in the moment and the everlasting is reminiscent of the Christian principal of eternity. Life is everlasting, and God is unchanging. In the same way the world and the lives in it do not change. The Superman enjoys this and invites even sorrow to repeat itself, because it means life eternal.

On the other hand, Zarathustra also experiences a chasm of depression in being the first to explicate the idea of eternal recurrence. In The Convalescent in Part III, he considers the implications of his teaching. The concepts of an eternal past and an eternal future repeating themselves perpetually makes the philosopher weary beyond measure. He is infinitely sorrowful that the weary and small truths he faces in his life must return eternally, to be faced over and over.

This eternity, for Zarathustra, tends to detract from the meaning of life by making all things similar to each other, including human beings. Even the greatest man seem similar to the smallest when considered in terms of eternal recurrence. There is no meaning, because there is nothing new and nothing that could be changed or developed in a different way than it has already been done. This prompts Zarathustra to "disgust in all existence."

This disgust is echoed in the writings of several authors, such as G.E. Gorfu, who finds the concept of eternal recurrence unacceptably horrifying, in addition to being inadequately substantiated by Nietzsche. Human life, according to Gorfu, cannot be simply a series of repetitions, doomed to last for an eternity, and having lasted for the same eternity.

Hi audience however encourages him to stop and consider the meaning of his teaching mission; to preach eternal recurrence and its meaning for the Superman. Zarathustra then uses the Superman and the will to power concepts to extract himself from his depression. He moves through a type of "dark night of the soul," where he learns to make peace with his philosophy and its position in life, as well as the position of his life in his philosophical view. Zarathustra concludes that life is indeed meaningful. By recurring as the same person living the same life, the Superman experiences it as an eternally recurring adventure. It is joy, because it does not annihilate. Regardless of the pain often experienced in a lifetime, the comfort is that it never ends.

Philosophers such as Matt Pike acknowledge that Nietzsche does not offer a large amount of significant proof for his views, but also point out that there is nothing to disprove it either. This theory of eternal recurrence, and its likelihood or lack thereof is addressed as a central theme in the novel The Unbearable Lightness of Being by Milan Kundera. The characters, as well as the reader, experience eternal recurrence on a variety of levels. Most notably in terms of Zarathustra's assertions, one might mention Tomas and Tereza, who keep returning to their relationship regardless of the sorrow it brings them both. They find a deeper meaning than surface joy in the relationship. They find the meaning of companionship and commitment to outweigh whatever satisfaction they find in returning to their lives as single people.

In the novel, Kundera offers the reader a glimpse of four lives in the form of four protagonists, who are inextricably linked with each other. Occasionally, the author intrudes with his own voice to make a philosophical observation. He for example opens the novel with a direct consideration of Nietzsche's eternal recurrence. He disputes Nietzsche's view that each life is literally recurring and that all events repeat themselves. The author uses significant events such as the French Revolution as substantiation for his views. He notes that eternal recurrence cannot possibly be interpreted on a literal level, as the recurrence of events such as the French Revolution and the Holocaust would certainly diminish their impact. With these views, Kundera appears to hold the view that the recurrence of these events would occur within a single lifetime on the one hand, and that human beings are aware of this recurrence on the other. Both these elements appear to be absent from Nietzsche's philosophy. Eternal recurrence is neither horrific, nor can it be proved precisely because human beings are unaware of it.

However, there are a number of different interpretations of the eternal recurrence phenomenon. One possible interpretation is for example the philosophy of reincarnation, as mentioned by Gorfu in rather negative terms. Proponents of this idea however rejects Nietzsche's view that, being unaware of all previous lifetimes, there is no improvement or growth. Reincarnation instead promotes the ideal that the human soul migrates and grows with each migration, until it reaches sufficient maturity to reach eternal bliss.

Another interpretation is the metaphorical (Corbett), which is also the interpretation favored by Kundera in The Unbearable Lightness of Being. Having substantiated his idea that Nietzsche's philosophy cannot be meant literally, the author proposes that things in life do repeat, but they do so in different form. In the opening pages of his book, Kundera (1) says:

Let us therefore agree that the idea of eternal return im-plies a perspective from which things appear other than as we know them: they appear without the mitigating circumstance of their transitory nature. This mitigating circumstance prevents us from coming to a verdict. For how can we condemn some-thing that is ephemeral, in transit?

Hence, Kundera's modification of Nietzsche's theme is that life and events are repetitive, and also change as they repeat. In this way, recurrence can be recognized, but only by those who pay attention. A further element of Nietzsche's philosophy that Kundera addresses is the Nihilism that flows from eternal recurrence. Being unaware of eternal recurrence, according to Nietzsche, condemns human beings to repeat all their decisions and all their mistakes throughout all eternity. This also condemns humanity to the ultimate meaninglessness of existence -- which Gorfu and other philosophers refer to as the "horror of existence."

Kundera on the other hand considers the balance of free will and meaning, even while promoting eternal recurrence in some form in his novel. Ultimately, he notes that life is as meaningless without a repetitive element as it is with Nietzsche's form of Nihilism. In the final pages of his novel, he for example refers to the necessity of repetition for meaning in life. Kundera laments the fact that the human experience of time is linear rather than circular. The very recurrence advocated by Nietzsche as being meaningless is what Kundera would name the ultimate meaning in life. Throughout the novel, Kundera attempts to demonstrate this with the central relationship of Tereza and Tomas, which is orbited by the other two main characters, Sabina and Franz.

Despite Kundera's own assertion that Nietzsche's eternal recurrence can only be interpreted metaphorically, he manifests four different forms of this philosophy by means of the lives he describes. These indeed include the literal interpretation, where actions and events literally repeat throughout a lifetime; the collective, where similar events occur in different lives but in similar relationships; the symbolic, where symbols recur within lifetimes, and the metaphorical, which Kundera describes in the beginning of the novel, where the same events occur in different forms. These forms of recurrence deserve some more detailed discussion, as follows.

Literal Recurrence

Tereza and Tomas's relationship is somewhat problematic from the beginning, but no less inevitable for it. It is as if the decision to stay together despite the fact that their needs and goals are incompatible is made on their behalf by a power similar to fate. Hence the various fateful events that resulted in their relationship. At their first encounter, Tereza comes down with a fever and Tomas nurses her back to health before she returns to her home. His indecision of whether to see her again is annihilated by Tereza's ultimate decision to visit him, complete with life in a suitcase.

At the beginning of the relationship, Tomas's recurring infidelities lead to recurring nightmares for Tereza. She suffers pain, humiliation and death during these dreams, signifying her subconscious experience of Tomas's addiction to other women. Tomas on the other hand suffers recurring pain at Tereza's unhappiness, which reaches its climax when she leaves him. Particularly, Tomas recurrently cheats on his wife with Sabina, his favorite mistress. These are all cases of literal recurrence in the relationship; similar choices are continually made, and Tereza and Tomas are condemned to eternal suffering as a result of choosing to stay together.

Even when they leave Prague for Switzerland, Tomas continues his choice to maintain his relationships with both Sabina and Tereza. It appears that the two supplement each other, which is why Tomas never leaves his wife for Sabina or indeed Sabina for is wife. It is a repetition that he needs to remain fulfilled in his life, as well as to maintain a sense of meaning and joy. Kundera (17) writes of Tomas:

"he thought happily that he carried his way of living with him as a snail carries his house. Tereza and Sabina represented the two poles of his life, sepa-rate and irreconcilable, yet equally appealing."

He therefore literally perpetuates the choices that he made in Prague, where he sees both his wife and mistress as supplemental to his happiness. This repetitive happiness is however destroyed when Tereza decides to move back to Prague. Although Tomas finds this mildly shocking when reading Tereza's letter to him, his first sensation is of joy and freedom. This freedom is a repetition of the lifestyle he enjoyed before agonizing over his feelings for Tereza. Tomas was once again free to pursue his carefree lifestyle in terms of several mistresses at the same time. He views his recurrence of freedom as follows (Kundera 18):

"New adventures hid around each corner. The future was again a secret. He was on his way back to the bachelor life, the life he had once felt destined for, the life that would let him be what he actually was."

This sense of freedom however does not last, and he finds that the only way to relieve his agony is to repeat his actions of the past: choose life with Tereza. Sadly, only the dog Karenin was happy to see him, effectively repeating the pattern of the relationship. Indeed, Karenin's experience of life and happiness is perhaps most representative of Kundera's central theme: recurrence is a requirement of the security that underlies human happiness. Indeed, Karenin is a model for Nietzsche's theory of eternal recurrence. Kundera (41) says that his concept of time moves "in a circle like the hands of a clock." Any change "disturbed his sense of time," whether this change entailed a minor modification like a new chair or a major event like the move to Switzerland. This is probably the most literal representation of the eternal recurrence theme in the novel.

The concept of collective recurrence is somewhat literal, in that events that are nearly the same repeat themselves for different people or across the lifetimes of different people. An interesting phenomenon here is the literal repetition of the events in the novel from the viewpoint of each character.

Symbolic Recurrence

There are two significant recurring symbols in the novel: Sabine's bowler hat and the mirror. The former represents the phenomenon of literal eternal recurrence, while the latter represents collective recurrence, where the image of the mirror is significant in the lives of both Sabine and Tereza. For the author, the bowler hat represents eternal recurrence as he sees it, in opposition to Nietzsche: the recurrence of the same phenomenon, but evolved, in a different form and meaning than before. Kundera (49) explains the symbolic significance of the bowler hat in Sabina's life as follows:

The bowler hat was a motif in the musical composition that was Sabina's life. It returned again and again, each time with a different meaning, and all the meanings flowed through the bowler hat like water through a riverbed…each time Sabina saw another river flow, another semantic river: each time the same object would give rise to a new meaning, though all former meanings would resonate (like an echo, like a parade of echoes) together with the new one. Each new experience would re-sound, each time enriching the harmony.

In this way, the bowler hat's significance is that of recurrent symbol and evolving meaning. This is precisely the meaning that Kundera attaches to Nietzsche's philosophy at the beginning of the novel. However, despite symbols like these, he appears to contradict himself at the end of the novel, when he asserts that human life is not circular, and therefore lacks both meaning and the means for happiness.

The mirror symbolism is particularly significant for Tereza, for whom it recurs during her abused youth and her emancipating meeting with Sabina. In her life with her mother, Tereza is made to feel worthless and common. She is in servitude to her mother's abuse and her status is lower than that of her stepfather, from whom the threat of physical abuse is always there. When she looks into a mirror, it is almost to express surprise at any image reflecting itself there. It is her one proof of selfhood that is not connected to her mother's skewed opinion of her.

For Sabina, the mirror is a reflection of her feminine beauty. Her beauty is her power. For Tereza, the mirror image of her childhood is a reflection not so much of her own weakness, but of her potential for escape; her potential power as a woman, a lover and a wife. This is the level upon which the mirror connects Tereza and Sabina. Like the symbolic image of the bowler hat, the signifier of the mirror changes in terms of signified. It becomes more than its former meaning, not to the destruction of the former meaning, but rather to its fulfillment. It is the symbol of the becoming self, and becomes the symbol of beauty, emancipation and power. In this way, it reflects the present fulfillment of the past.

Metaphorical Recurrence

The metaphorical is the only form of eternal recurrence that the author acknowledges, although the novel clearly includes several. The most interesting form of metaphorical eternal recurrence, as most closely related to Nietzsche's view of repetitive events, is the Moses imagery as applied to Tereza and Tomas. This image also recurs later in the novel. For Tomas, Tereza is like a child coming to him on a river, like Moses did (Kundera 4):

"He had come to feel an inexplicable love for this all but complete stranger; she seemed a child to him, a child someone had put in a bulrush basket daubed with pitch and sent down-stream for Tomas to fetch at the riverbank of his bed."

This imagery has a number of implications for Tomas's view of his relationship with Tereza. Firstly, she represents weakness that needs protection. Tereza is aware of this weakness, as imposed both by her own history and Tomas's conception of it. Like her nightmares, the weakness is a recurring theme both in her life as an individual and her life as Tomas's wife; as part of a couple. Her illness establishes her weakness, like that of a child, in Tomas's mind from the beginning of their relationship. Like the weakness imposed by her mother, this is a conception of her that she escapes only temporarily by means of the mirror.

From her mother, she escapes every time she glances in the mirror. This is an act of rebellion, as her mother views the mirror as an instrument of vanity, which was a sin in her view. Her escape from the weakness imposed by Tomas is more complete, but also only temporary. She escapes with Sabina, and also briefly when she leaves Tomas to return to her life in Prague. Tomas however reimposes himself upon her and the relationship continues, with neither Tomas nor Tereza truly having any control over it.

The image of Moses in the basket therefore imposes upon Tereza both a positive and negative connotation. She is a gift to save Tomas from the loneliness incurred by his loss of wife and child, and of his parents. His inability to remain on friendly terms with his wife after their divorce cost him a potential relationship with his son, and also his relationship with his parents. Unknown to Tereza, this also causes a type of weakness in Tomas.

For Tomas, weakness occurs in the form of fear; a fear of commitment, a fear of women, and a fear of relationships in general. It is this fear that disables him from having a positively functioning relationship with Tereza. He needs her weakness, and her illness during their first meeting is precisely what makes her appealing to him. His shallow relationships with other women have the common factor that he cannot control them. Hence he refrains from becoming more deeply involved with persons he can view as equal to himself.

Tereza's appeal lies in the fact that she provides a surrogate conglomeration of relationships, although she takes the traditional form of wife. She is however not so much a sexual partner to him as a comfort to help him fall asleep (Kundera 9):

Tomas came to this conclusion: Making love with a woman and sleeping with a woman are two separate passions, not merely different but opposite. Love does not make itself felt in the desire for copulation (a desire that extends to an infinite num-ber of women) but in the desire for shared sleep (a desire limit-ed to one woman).

Tereza fulfills the role of dispelling his fear, because she is weak. Ironically, her weakness dissipates his own. In this way, the theme of weakness recurs for both Tereza and Tomas, although for Tomas the weakness is more subtle. Ultimately, Tereza becomes Tomas's weakness. He is unable to return to his life as bachelor, although this is what he initially believes that he is meant to be.

He is unable to escape the lure of Tereza's role in his life, despite the fact that this makes both him and his wife unhappy. This, along with his desire for other women, is his recurring weakness and the cause of the recurring events of his life, including his perpetual relationship with his wife and his continuous relationship with Sabina. It is almost poetic that they die together, as trapped in their car, and in death, as they were by their marriage and their lives.

Concomitantly, Tereza's weakness remains inescapable. Almost like an addict, she considers returning to her mother when she leaves Tomas. It is as if she is as drawn to her own weakness as Tomas is to his other women. It is like an addiction.

The weakness that the central couple in the novel suffers provides the basis for metaphorical eternal recurrence in the novel. It centers around the image of the child in the basket; helpless on a river until the Egyptian princess saves him. Both Tomas and Tereza are weak when they meet. The weakness does not however transform into strength when they meet each other and are saved. Instead, it transforms into a different type of weakness, perpetuating Kundera's idea of metaphorical recurrence, where repetitive elements return in evolved form.

Conclusion

Kundera's novel is constructed in such a way that it represents various ideas and contradictions surrounding eternal recurrence. On the one hand, Kundera appears to oppose Nietzsche's form of this philosophy, while on the other hand he appears to accept it. Throughout the novel, there is a contradiction between the circular and the linear experience of time, life, and death.

When Tomas and Tereza die in an accident, Sabine is overcome with the fact that she is now expected to continue life without them. They were central to her sense of existence for a long time. Sabine's experience of their death is therefore linear -- they are never to recur in her lifetime. However, this is not so for the reader. After receiving the news of their death, the reader is once again presented with Tomas and Tereza's experience of life, which continues to the end of the novel. This provides a circular effect of their lives, with death simply being one event among many -- neither more or less important than the other.

Towards the end of the novel, it is also significant that Kundera notes the meaninglessness of a linear life. Life is experienced as linear, and therefore lacks both meaning and joy for humanity. According to Kundera, the repetition of things and events is essential for happiness. It provides stability and meaning. Yet the author appears to contradict himself by means of the various repeating elements throughout the novel. Particularly, the mirror and the bowler hat offer structure to the respective lives of Sabina and Tereza.

Furthermore, on a more literal level. All the characters in the novel experience life as routine. Both work and pleasure follow a pattern, not only for the dog Karenin, but also for the human beings. Tomas for example revels in the similar routines he is able to establish in Prague and Switzerland.

This contradiction between the linear and the circular can be related to the theme of the book; the difference between what is light and what is heavy. Tomas experiences his freedom as lightness when Tereza leaves him. He however finds this unbearable and prefers the recurrence of his relationship and its routine, as does Tereza. The circular, responsible, and often dull routine can then be seen as representative of heaviness as opposed to the "unbearable lightness of being," which is represented by the linear, the unpredictable and the irresponsible. That latter is devoid of symbol and meaning, or at least appears so because of human unawareness.

The Unbearable Lightness of Being provides the reader with a quite unique perspective on Nietzsche's philosophy of eternal recurrence. It suggests that recurrence occurs within the lifetime and collectively over time in metaphorical terms. It goes on to contradict itself. It ultimately provides a message that is beyond the words on its pages.

Sources

Corbett, Bob. Comments on The Unbearable Lightness of Being. Oct 2001. http://www.webster.edu/~corbetre/personal/reading/kundera-unbearable.html

Fraser, Giles. Meet Dr. Nietzsche: Response to comments. 2 Nov 2008 http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/nov/02/religion-nietzsche-responses.

Gorfu, G.E. Nietzsche's Eternal Recurrence. 2000. http://www.meskot.com/recurrence.htm

Kundera, Milan. The Unbearable Lightness of Being. 1984 Available online: http://www.truly-free.org/#fK

Lowith, Karl, Nietzsche's Philosophy of the Eternal Recurrence of the Same. University of California Press, 1997.

Nietzsche, Friedrich. Thus Spake Zarathustra. Available online: http://www.gutenberg.org/files/1998/1998-h/1998-h.htm

Pike, Matt. The Doctrine of Eternal Recurrence Comes Back Again… 2005. http://www.matt-pike.com/papers/EternalRecurrence.php