Introduction

Written:  January 4, 2013

I wrote this blog ten years ago in 2013 - which was the 200th anniversary of Wagner's birth. I have now renamed it, put it in "book order" where it is meant to be read from the beginning to the end.  All the "published dates" are bogus - but I put the date I truly wrote it at the top of each post.. I have done only limited updating and added just one chapter (the Epilogue).  I have put a lot of material that was interspersed in the blog in appendixes after the epilogue. This material can be read at any time and is not in the logical sequence as the "book" part is. The comments are from the original blog.

In 2013, the 200th anniversary of Richard Wagner’s birth, I launched a blog called Wagner Tripping. Subtitled In search of ecstasy, perspective, and dissonance resolution in the composer’s bicentennial birth year, it began—as the title hints—with a personal story: how I came to Wagner through opera, through passion, and, yes, through LSD.

This project is now being updated. I’m fixing broken links, bad fonts, typos, and grammar, and making sure the footnotes and references actually work. I’m also weaving in new material, but the core structure remains the same—eight sections that build toward a conclusion, followed by a set of appendices with supplemental material. Each section can stand alone, but I’ve arranged them to build a cumulative argument.

Here’s the map:

1. Wagner’s Musical Effects – Why his music is so emotionally powerful.

2. The Character Assassination of Richard Wagner – A look at his personality, to sort justified criticism from caricature.

3. Wagner’s Anti-Semitism – Explored in historical and psychological context, including broader reflections on the roots of prejudice.

4. His Abnormal Mind – Enough said.

5. His Cultural Influence – Immense, strange, and still unfolding.

6. A Feminist Critique of the Feminist Critique – Yes, that’s what I mean.

7. Wagner and Hunter S. Thompson – Parallel lives, a century apart.

8. Conclusion – Reclaiming Wagner as a full and remarkable human being.

This is not an academic blog, but I’ve done a lot of reading, listening, and thinking over the years. I’m especially writing for those who say, “I love Wagner’s music but I hate him.” To me, that’s a nonsensical position. Wagner’s music was a window into his soul—he was bound to it in a way unique among opera composers. That’s the case I’ll be making across these posts.

My journey with Wagner began on a road trip to see my first Ring Cycle in Seattle in 2001. While driving, random thoughts about him kept bubbling up, and I scribbled them down at rest stops or red lights. (Not the safest method, I’ll admit, but I kept my eyes on the road—though my handwriting paid the price.) Since then, Wagner has continued to accompany me—especially on long journeys, though these days I’m more likely to fly.

When I first encountered Wagner’s music, I assumed that anyone who could write such profound and beautiful work must be, in some sense, a profound and beautiful person. Then I started reading. What a letdown! “A monster,” “a dreadful human being,” “arrogant, dishonest, jealous, hypocritical, racist, sexist, and passionately anti-Semitic.” Was he really that bad?

After years of reflection, my answer is: no, not remotely. What we’ve inherited is a flattened, negative caricature—stripped of context and complexity. That’s what I try to correct in Section Two.

This blog was born from my frustration with the way Wagner has been treated—often with intellectual laziness, distortion, or just plain meanness. Some criticisms are fair. Many are not. And very few make any serious effort to understand the man in his own time or on his own terms.

Today, you don’t get credit for writing a fair or balanced book about Wagner. (Yes, I used that phrase long before Fox News co-opted it, and no, I won’t give it up.) Anything short of condemnation is dismissed as an “apology,” as if striving for perspective were a moral failing. That’s absurd. Historical clarity isn’t exoneration. It’s just honesty—and Wagner deserves at least that.

In my final post of the original blog, I tried to bring it all together—to reclaim Wagner not as a saint, but as a full, brilliant, flawed, fascinating human being. I’m very glad he was born 200 years ago, and I hope this updated blog helps others see why.

Preface

Written: January 1, 2013

Chapter 1: Happy New Year’s Day!
And—far more important to me—Happy Wagner Bicentennial Birth Year!

Now, this probably isn’t a momentous occasion for most people—neither Wagner’s bicentennial nor this blog. I’d guess that, in the United States, the vast majority of people know very little about Wagner and virtually nothing about his music—aside from a few cartoonish snippets. (Cue: Kill the wabbit!)

In short, most people couldn’t care less. He’s not their cup of tea, they assume—wrongly, in many cases. Then there are the more aggressive types: those who actively loathe Wagner and would rather see him flushed down the cultural cesspool, usually without knowing much about him or his music. I find that… irritating.

I love Wagner’s music. He is, without question, the musical love of my life—and that realization struck me like a thunderbolt. But I’m not in the “love the music, hate the man” camp. I actually like Wagner the man, warts and all.

How can I say that about someone often described as a monster?

Well, that’s one of the reasons I’m writing this blog. There’s no quick answer that does the question justice—at least none that have ever come to my mind.

I’ve been intending to write about Wagner since 2001. Originally, I imagined it as a book—before blogging was even a thing. But a blog makes more sense anyway. I can include links to music, performances, essays, and other material. My original plan was to start writing upon my retirement in 2007 and finish in 2013 to coincide with Wagner’s 200th birthday.

But life—and, to be honest, laziness—got in the way.  So I decided: I’ll just put out what I can in 2013, and that’ll be that.

My intent in this blog is not to censor myself—much. Christopher Hitchens, paraphrasing Nadine Gordimer, once wrote: “A serious person should try to write posthumously… One should compose as if the usual constraints—of fashion, commerce, self-censorship, public and especially intellectual opinion—did not operate.” That’s my aim.

Even if it’s embarrassing when I talk about sex and Wagner.  Even if I feel ambivalent about revealing—or maybe even reveling in—felonious behavior.  For the record: I’m not a scholar. (Yes, I worked at a university—but as a maintenance person. I plunged scholars’ toilets.)

I don’t read music. I can’t tell a sharp from a flat. I don’t play an instrument. I can’t sing. And I grew up hating classical music. In other words: I’m exactly the kind of person Wagner was writing for. (I’ll come back to that in a future post.)

Because this blog has no academic pretensions, I’ll be speaking plainly. I don’t plan to mince words. There will be the occasional—okay, maybe regular—vulgarity. Because frankly, so much surrounding Wagner can only be called bullshit. No other word fits.

That said, don’t mistake informality for unreliability. I care deeply about truth and fairness. If you’re going to make a controversial claim, you damn well better back it up. If you can’t—or won’t—then you shouldn’t say it.  I’m not from Missouri, but I should be.

If you ever believe I’ve failed to support something properly, let me know—I’ll track it down like a pig after truffles. Or retract it if I can’t.  I’ll use real footnotes. And links. Sometimes links as footnotes.

So let my little personal celebration—and long, winding reflection—on Wagner begin.