/lit/ - Literature

>>15514581
ignore kaufmann, read deleuze's take, but bear in mind that its a reconstruction and not really what nietzsche had in mind

>>15514604
Unrelated question, did you read The Will to Power, if so what did you think of it? I'm on the fence as to whether to consider it a true work of Nietzsche's or not.

>>15514581
i would ignore him. he's fun, but not a serious philosopher like rawls or kant. i would go so far as to say that his ideas can even be dangerous for open societies

>>15514639
>his ideas can even be dangerous for open societies
No shit. And it's too late, I've already read most of his works which is why I made this thread now that I'm looking at all my notes and taking stock of things.

>>15514639
this isn't me, obviously a jealous rejected applicant.

>>15514604
fpbp. Hard mode: read Solomon, Higgins, Leiter, Acampora, Clarke, (basically the descendants of Kaufmann who didn’t indulge in apologetics) etc. and salvage what’s valuable for yourself. Kaufmann is outdated, you may as well ask if you should read the Heidegger volumes: sure, if you are doing serious research or need an overview of the scholarship through it’s most prominent texts, but not if you’re just trying to wrap your head around Nietzsche. Also recommend Kofmann, Ansell-Pearson, and Dienstag.

>>15514636
WTP is a nonissue in the scholarship: we adopt it wholesale, admit some historical context/lack of certainty, and proceed with caution. I don’t think I’ve ever read it all the way through as it is published but through needing different sections at different points of study in the other texts. I will say though you shouldn’t read any scholarship beyond introductions before you have read all of his major works (so Birth of Tragedy, Gay Science, Zarathustra, Genealogy, Beyond Good and Evil, Twilight of the Idols, and Ecce Homo, and, yeah, WTP).

>>15514639
>>15514647
no one cares tripfag. get the rope.

>>15514677
in what order would you recommend reading nietzsche? total neophyte here.

>>15514581
The only secondary Neech sources you should read are the Triad
>Deleuze's Nietzsche and Philosophy, >Bataille's On Nietzsche
>Heidegger's Nietzsche
There, that's all you need.

>>15514772
I’ll get shit for this but I can only speak to my own experience, which, for what it’s worth, has led me to academic publication. Gay Science Book Three and Four, On the Genealogy of Morals, On Truth and Lies, Beyond Good and Evil, Twilight of the Idols or the rest of GS (at this point you should have a solid grounding of the development of N’s thought to let you navigate which would be more immediately useful), Thus Spoke Zarathustra, Birth of Tragedy, Will to Power, Ecce Homo, Antichrist. I don’t find Human All Too Human, Daybreak, or Untimely Meditations all that useful, and the Contra Wagner or The Case of Wagner should be reserved exclusively for aesthetics. I’d say I started reading secondary stuff (even though, again, I advise against it), after TSZ because it really is the crowning achievement that synthesizes and anticipates a lot of what he’ll later flesh out. If you find yourself lost, I recommend the Cambridge Companion, Solomon and Higgins What Nietzsche Really Said, and honestly the Stanford and Wikis are fairly helpful. Kaufmann’s introductions are always good, as are Hollander’s (and those are pretty much the guys you'll want to stick to for translations, except for maybe Clarke’s Genealogy which I hear is good). Brian Leiter runs a popular philosophy blog, and he has a section dedicated to Nietzsche, which formally is a field he’s an expert in. Pearson also has some stuff floating around online that can be helpful. By the tome you get to BGE, if you’re still feeling lost, look at a section in Twilight of Idols called the Four Great Errors and you will have a skeleton key to Nietzsche’s rough-and-dirty historical-cultural-philosophical framework. I think it is good to read him as really only caring about undoing history of philosophy by cutting the neck at the source: Plato. In this way, he anticipates a lot of pomo guys who react against the Enlightenment (which is by some, and certainly this account, the result of Platonic thought), and those guys clearly find their motivation in anti-history of philosophy (especially its academic or “scientific” context, eg Hegel). One red herring I think a lot of people get caught up on, though, is assuming this means Nietzsche is explicitly anti Kant, and in a lot of ways he is, but I think epsitemically he’s still operating within Kant’s paradigm outlined in CPR, and generally just isn’t interested in epistemology of metaphysics as such. The bigger question, or the higher psychology of Nietzsche, is going to be the value of things, right down the line to our supposedly metaphysical thoughts, and what those indicates about our health. Also, I’ll just say this outright (don’t worry too much about understanding it now just keep it as a mantra): everything is will to power. There is no secondary metaphysical position, there’s no room for anything else. WTP is Nietzsche’s positive philosophical claim, and it dominates the conceptual terrain.

>>15514906
Oh, and I guess I should just tell you outright, the antichrist stuff is solely a historical thing. The spiritual-philosophical mechanisms permitting something like Christianity are indicative of larger historical processes of decline, and that’s more of what he is interested in. Naturally, these discussions require a lot of rhetoric to get off the ground, especially when your audience is existing within that framework. But Christianity itself is a mere contingency. The god involved in “death of god” may as well be “values,” at least as you probably understand them right now, for your purposes. You will only widen your scope of this as you read onward though.

tl;dr don’t let the edgelords throw you off. there’s serious thought going on.

>>15514906
>>15514922
thanks so much for this! i plan to start reading him this summer.

>>15514944
Best of luck to you! I can only sing his praises. If not anything, he will show you the scope of history of philosophy like no other thinker.

>>15514958
hey man if i sent you a link really quick to an email would you mind reading over a reading list i have running on nietzsche?
can't tell you how much i would appreciate it, you seem to know really your shit

>>15514975
for sure, it’ll take maybe an hour or so because im mobileposting right now and dont have a secure email i can post right away. if this is rapture asking, ive seen your list and yeah dude it’s solid. precisely what i probably have amalgamated across many ann. bibliographies. i can double check it later though.

>>15515009

oh dude that's amazing, thanks, didn't want to trip to be confused with this impersonator >>15514647

i really appreciate it. if there is anything i can help with/do in return, lemme know.

i've updated the list already with some more suggestions; eventually i will break down all lists to represent a kinda trajectory suggestion as you effectively do here (which is great): >>15514906

for now i'm looking for comprehensiveness--stuff that a freshman could apprehend (hence the Prideaux biography--but if you think this is in fact damaging, let me know) as well as grads/post-grads. you get the idea.

again, many thanks.

>>15514581
The best takes on Nietzche i've encountered are from Deleuze, Vattimo and Volpi.

>>15514809
Heidegger talks about Heidegger in his "Nietzsche".

>>15515037
If you wanted to send whatever current list you have to gottfriedsemper@protonmail.com feel free to. And I may take you up on that lol. With all the covid stuff, coinciding with phishing on uni servers, a lot of my former research database plugs are inaccessible at the moment, so I greatly appreciate that (i recall seeing a few pics of your collection years back and i know you have a truly great resource there).

>for now i'm looking for comprehensiveness--stuff that a freshman could apprehend (hence the Prideaux biography--but if you think this is in fact damaging, let me know) as well as grads/post-grads. you get the idea.
I can definitely email more organized feedback, I will say outright that alot of the usual suspects on your list have also made great efforts to write such guides for undergrads (and I think this is kind of unique to Nietzsche, because he is so popular, so misunderstood, yet the vitality is there in the prose, and, of course, Kaufmann really did inundate his students with an ethos of recovery, which is admirable for our efforts). So, if for whatever reason you have the additional time, combing Leiter or Solomon or whoever beyond their canonical works usually has its rewards (I am fine with being that outsourced apparatus for you though, Nietzsche is one of the hundreds of other thinkers I'm sure you want to do this for).

>>15515133
>replying to yourself

>>15515090
What by Volpi? I don't think I've ever encountered his stuff in the wild before (because of lack of translations maybe?).

>>15515140
Il Nichilismo
There are like 2 chapters on Nietzsche and it left a good impression on me at the time

>>15515133
awesome, thanks. my ideal is to level out at a certain point of comprehensiveness then not only break down for trajectory, but also for levels of entry: freshman, masters, phd, etc.
excellent stuff, anon, will email soon.

thanks again!

>>15514581
I believe Nietzsche is a pretty straight forward read, even in English. If you don’t get something, it may just be because you lack the life experience to comprehend it. Don’t assume everything he says can be understood through thinking. You can only comprehend what you’re ready for, ideas that were already on the edge of your grasp.

>>15515162
have you ever considered that ppl can find shit to read on their own and that maybe your energy would be better spent performing original analysis, especially considering how much you've read? i think most people can tell whether a book is over their head without a tripfag telling them whether or not they can read it

>>15515206
i do that too, you stupid asshole
leave me the fuck alone, you have no clue what i'm after or what it all amounts to. don't pretend for a second that you do.
if you don't care about the lists, then fuck off and stay outta my way.
ignoring your dumbass from here on out.

>>15515224
cant even tell if this is a fake or not, you should rly secure your trip

>>15515206
>have you ever considered that ppl can find shit to read on their own
Considering this site, no, I doubt many people can find shit to read on their own, unless they are in a particularly good program in uni and have the resources extended to them