Rating:  -
I don't like Nietzsche. His theories are inhumane, and his insights psychotic. But anyone who reads the man's work knows that even after translation (by the prestigious RJ Hollingdale), Nietzsche's ability to write beautiful prose is an indisputable fact. One must often wonder where his ideas would be today if he had been a mediocre story teller?
Thus Spoke Zarathustra is, in my humble opinion, the place where anyone who wants to read Nietzsche should start. The ideas are deliniated clearly and the fashion in which they are strew is fully comprehendable. Or, if you prefer, try Beyond Good and Evil.
RSM
Rating:  -
Nietzsche's Thus Spoke Zarathustra remains one of the most powerful and cryptic tomes in the history western thought. Is this a work of philosophy or poetry? Due to the immense power of Nietzsche's writing, it remains highly readable, even for those who are not usually comfortable reading philosophy. In the prologue, Nietzsche describes Zarathustra's isolation in the mountains and his intention to descend so that he can teach mankind. Zarathustra proclaims that God is dead and the overman, the sort of man who has overcome his own nature. Zarathustra proclaims: "The time has come for man to set himself a goal. The time has come for man to plant the seed of his highest hope" (17). Nietzsche is passing his philosophical project onto Zarathustra as an author might pass his personal impressions onto a fictional character. Zarathustra is a new symbol of wisdom in the modern era; he teaches that man is now burdened with the task of creating a meaning for himself. In Zarathustra's speeches, he speaks of the "three metamorphoses of the spirit" (25), which include how the spirit becomes a camel, the camel a lion, and the lion a child. For Nietzsche, even the lion of freedom is not sufficient; the child who can create represents the possibility of an overman. Zarathustra says: "The child is innocence and forgetting, a new beginning, a game, a self-propelled wheel, a first movement, a sacred `Yes.' For the game of creation, my brothers, a sacred `Yes' is needed: the spirit now wills his own will, and he who had been lost to the world now conquers his own world" (27). Zarathustra teaches man that God is the result of an act of creation, that man is capable of willing new gods and goals. He says: "this god whom I created was man-made and madness, like all Gods!" (33). Zarathustra might be called the God of the Body as he claims that it was originally the sick and decaying who hated the body and nature and subsequently created heaven. Zarathustra provides and alternative: "Listen rather, my brothers, to the voice of the healthy body: that is a more honest and purer voice. More honestly and purely speaks the healthy body that is perfect and perpendicular: and it speaks of the meaning of the earth" (33). Zarathustra warns man of the power of `Good and Evil,' of preachers of virtues and the soul. However, for all of man's creative efforts in conjuring systems of value, man still is left without a clear goal. Zarathustra concludes the first book by insisting that he will only return when his listeners have denied him, for he desires to cultivate an independence of thought.
In the second book, Zarathustra returns and begins to speak about creation and pitying. In the second section (Upon the Blessed Isles), he argues that "God is a conjecture; but I desire that your conjectures should not reach beyond your creative will. Could you create a god? Then do not speak to me of any gods. But you could well create the overman [...] of the overman you could recreate yourselves: and let this be your best creation" (86). For Zarathustra, creation is the solution to redeem man from his suffering. Additionally, man's will to power is a potentially liberating capacity. In the fifth section, Zarathustra critically examines different conceptions of traditional virtue. He says: "you are too pure for the filth of the words: revenge, punishment, reward, retribution" (94). After much vivisection and refutation, Zarathustra moves into a discussion of the possible meaning of existence for man in the section On the Tarantulas. Here, he makes a proposal: "For that man be delivered from revenge, that is for me the bridge to the highest hope, and a rainbow after long storms" (99). Zarathustra warns man to mistrust all who have a powerful inclination to seek revenge and enact punishment.In book three, Zarathustra continues his prophetic teachings to mankind, though he insists that he is "Godless" (170). He reflects about the absence of having a true audience; one gets the impression that Zarathustra is echoing Nietzsche's loneliness as a largely unrecognized philosopher and writer. He continues with a transvaluation of all values wherein Zarathustra declares the `three best cursed things,' which are: "sex, the lust to rule, [and] selfishness" (188). He condemns Christianity's disapproval of these things, arguing that sex represents a happiness of the body, the lust to rule is a variant of the will to power, and selfishness is a mode of self enjoyment. Zarathustra is concerned that the dominant institutions of our time have conditioned human beings to hate and fear themselves. Additionally, he teaches man about man's ultimate purpose, which he describes in the third section of `The Old and New Tablets,' where he writes: "There it was too that I picked up the word `overman' by the way, and that man is something that must be overcome-that man is a bridge and no end" (198). For Zarathustra, a going under is a crossing over, a transition. In this way, mankind is taught to confront his own mortality.
In `The Convalescent,' Zarathustra rests for seven days after a collapse in his cave. He is upset with the animals for watching him in pain, for pain and cruelty (whether it is directed inward or outward) is the greatest flaw of man. It is here that Zarathustra gives his most profound teaching: "Alas, man recurs eternally! The small man recurs eternally!' Zarathustra has established his reason for being: to teach the eternal recurrence of the same. All events and beings of the universe have existed an infinite number of times and will continue to repeat eternally. Zarathustra claims: "I myself belong to the causes of the eternal recurrence. I come again, with this sun, with this earth, with this eagle, with this serpent-not to a new life or a better life or a similar life: I come back eternally to this same, selfsame life, in what is greatest as in what is smallest, to teach again the eternal recurrence of all the things" (221). It is because of the eternal recurrence of the same that mankind should affirm life and will subsequently overcome nihilism. Zarathustra expresses a desire that mankind embrace himself as such, and to be willing to act as a bridge for something greater. He declares: "You are mere bridges: may men higher than you stride over you. You signify steps: therefore do not be angry with him who climbs over you to his height" (283). According to Zarathustra, it is only since God has died that mankind can be resurrected. In `On the Higher Man,' Zarathustra announces the life of the overman, an indication of a higher being able to climb over man. Zarathustra announces: "O my brothers, what I can love in man is that he is an overture and a going under [...] Overcome these masters of today, O my brothers-these small people, they are the overman's greatest danger" (287). Human beings must, in accordance with their nature, be willing to go down in order to go across. They are the bridge to something higher. The thought of eternal return contains many facets and implications. One the one hand, the notion of eternity without the trajectory of a goal and without a definitive close could be viewed as the essence of nihilism or pessimism. However, this is not a complete thought of eternal recurrence. Yet if the thinker understands the relation between nihilism and the eternal recurrence of the same, he can fully affirm life.
Rating:  -
Nietzsche espouses a desire to create Supermen, who will be superior to modern humans. He vilifies pity, charity and sympathy as being weak and glorifies the warrior and those who would be cruel to create strength in themselves and others. His character Zarathustra speaks in a stilted, medieval way which, I suppose, is supposed to call to mind biblical passages.
While I accept the importance of this work as philosophy and classic literature, I have to mark it as 3 stars because I felt this was, to a great extent, the philosophy espoused by Nazi Germany - at any rate, I could see where this formed part of the backbone of their society. I did not really enjoy reading it, although I feel it is important to read as many and as varied works as possible in order that I might learn something new all the time. Read it as a classical work, and as a philosophical masterpiece, but if you are troubled by the history of the Nazis, you will likely find the ideals espoused in this text to be uncomfortable.
Rating: -
To start off with, the Walter Kaufmann translation is by now well known to be probably the authoritative edition of Zarathustra (although the excerpts I've read from the Del Caro Cambridge Texts edition seems to be perhaps a more beautiful style). One of the reasons I originally picked up this edition was because the only translations available over the web were the droning and pedantic Thomas Common versions which are not only dull but muddled. Walter Kaufmann's translation gives a degree of clarity that far surpasses the Common translation, cannot speak to all the differences (however large or small) between it and the Del Caro version.
The book isn't particularly long, but Nietzsche fills it with metaphors and parables in addition to simple narrative and merriment. This is one of the challenges of the book: you're forced to figure out what is meaningful from what isn't and on top of that what each metaphor means. Nietzsche has never been in the habit of going into intricate detail or clarifying what he's saying to the same degree as some other thinkers, and although the book is a stylistic masterpiece (with narrative deliberately done in a biblical style and herein lies one of the advantages over the Common translation, namely that Common translated everything to mimic the King James version with an overabundance of "thees" "thous" and "ests") the philosophy is at times difficult to comprehend. Again, it's not difficult in the sense that the Critique of Pure Reason is difficult, or at least not nearly to the same degree, it is difficult because it is at times cryptic.
Additionally, I've seen a lot of reviews suggesting reading Nietzsche just for the pithy phrases or the beauty of the work. And while the work is indeed a very beautiful piece in places and is often quotable (and even considering Nietzsche was very big into each individual making his own meaning, creating his own path or values), I'd caution you against that approach. Although the book has a strong "make your own way" line of thought, that doesn't preclude understanding the ways of others.
I will admit that this is a contender for one of the more difficult books I've ever read (up there with Kant, though Nietzsche's previous and subsequent books are by far easier to understand). I've noticed that numerous readers recommend reading the book a second time. I'd say that might be useful, but it would take someone with either a lot of free time on their hands or someone with a very great degree of insight to grasp the meaning of each part of this work. What I found useful was having read other works by Nietzsche first. Before reading Zarathustra (which I read for the first time when I was 15 at the urging of a friend who was taking political science and philosophy in college) I had already read On the Genealogy of Morality and Human, All Too Human. My recommendation is to read at least one of Nietzsche's other books, preferably a couple. I'd suggest making Beyond Good and Evil one of your choices. By doing this, you will have already been introduced to Nietzschean philosophy and will be able to more readily grasp the symbolism used.
Even if you don't choose that approach, you should get the main lines of thought, specifically the eternal recurrence of the same, the overman, and the glorification of struggle, in the work. Either way, this book is a landmark work in the history of philosophy and deserves to be read.
Rating: -
This edition has a useful preface written by the translator, explaining why he thinks it is superior to prior transaltions from the German. His interspersed explanations throughout the book were informative. Nietzche, of course, gives the reader more than he/she can handle. Even if you don't understand all his allegories and ideas, there are enough gems in here that anyone can enjoy. I suspect that a second reading would be even more rewarding.
|
