Apollo and Dionysus

 Nietszche has already talked a lot about Apollo and Dionysus as representing two distinct poles of human nature. Whereas Apollo represents structure, art and order, Dionysus has often been associated with a kind of wild fertility. I have recently begun to wonder, however-particularly in light of my recent unit in Greek mythology--which of these two polarities should be stressed more?
  From a Buddhist perspective, perhaps another way of looking at this is the middle way. When the strings of a lyre are too tight, a rigid discipline sets in. It's as though a person were entirely governed by serious endeavors and, in the process, left behind the sense of play. On the other hand, too much relaxation can lead to a complete lack of principle or blindness. Both tendencies represent extremes, and yet they also somehow embody a utopian ideal. Although one might idealize "total" order or "total" chaos as the ultimate solution to humanity's problems, in fact, no part of ourselves ought to be left behind or repressed. It needs to be transformed to suit the greater aims of society without repressing these aims.
   In meditative practice, there is a definite tendency to want to achieve lofty goals in practice, and yet the body pulls one into pain and pleasure, vexations and obstacles. These obstacles aren't really "obstacles" at all but they are opportunities to stop identifying oneself with only one character trait. In fact, a truly integrated personality encompasses many character traits. But if I am committed to being only one kind of person and miss out on other aspects of myself, I end up revisiting these disowned parts of myself in others. Why the universe works this way, I have no idea, but it's something like: the person who bothers or annoys me is really inviting me to consider parts of myself that I don't really admire. If I can accept those aspects existing deep within myself that I dislike, then I can accept such qualities in others as well.