/lit/ - Literature

oh, you couldn't know, but it is a common misinterpretation that people without a mustache are still able to understand nietzsche. that however is false.

don't worry though, i heard wearing a fake one on a regular basis works too.

>>2423709
>thinks hipsters are still sporting a moustache, and not a fully ironic beard.

>>2423721
> thinks i was talking about a hipster moustache instead of a nietzsche one.

reference picture included.

You have plebeian comprehension skills,try harder, 2deep4u, etc.

>>2423729
Sorry. I just here Nee-chu is for hipsters used a lot here, I get lost.

>>2423730
you wish, faggot.

hardly anybody takes the art-perspective of the birth of tragedy seriously, op. it's more read for his negation of schopenhauer's nihilism.

>>2423672
Modern philosophy is pretty much for morons who can't get a grip on reality. All these men either hated women, society, their parents or indulged in themselves. Its basically all just pseudointellectualism for bored overclass.

>>2423780

>lol the # of analytic Anglo-american philosofucks that fit this description

>>2423780
That's exactly what it feels like when I'm reading this. Don't get me wrong, the prose is good and it's definitely interesting...but more so in the sense that reading Swedenborg is interesting even though he was probably just out of his mind.

Like, I can understand shit like the Greek chorus representing the ideal spectator, but then he goes on about the merging of the Apollonian and Dionysian which just reads like mystical pseudo-intellectualism. Did Nietzsche even art?

Birth of Tragedy is Rad As Hell

but you should probably read his other shit, but seriously Rad As Hell

>>2423672
I've seen that pic dozens of times due to /lit/'s odd but not totally-incomprehensible infatuation with them and I still don't know what she's reading.

>>2424003

Why do you think so?

>>2423994

I don't even know what it's from, I just took it from here.

>>2423991
>Did Nietzsche even art?

Professor of Philology at 24. He was friends with Wagner and wrote his own music at times.

>>2424003
Huh? I just meant I can't see the title.

I also have a question regarding Nietzche and his relevance, and that is: Does anyone take Nietzsche's moral philosophy seriously anymore? I've not read another philosopher who continues on with what he wrote on.

>>2424026
You seriously consider philology an art? I knew he was friends with Wagner, but Wagner said some pretty retarded shit himself.

>>2424090
I fucked up, you were supposed to get the "I don't even know what it's from, I just took it from here." comment.

Nietzsche constantly talked about becoming primal, will-driven individuals. However, he also was a total loon who frowned upon individuals who weren't fancy, well-cultured, and refined.

The man was just fucking wacko-jacko. I don't like hypocritical authors who don't the support the very things they write. That is unless he was an ultra-troll, making men go stupid to become "Overmen".

>>2424190
>Nietzsche constantly talked about becoming primal, will-driven individuals. However, he also was a total loon who frowned upon individuals who weren't fancy, well-cultured, and refined.
he believed theres a perfect balance between the two

>>2424190
Your post is full of stupid.

I don't see who could agree with glorifying some of the most terrible times to live in history though.

>>2424026
His Operas were shit though. And Nietzsche knew it.

>>2426392
He knew it after the fact. He was obsessed with Wagner for years before he realized Wagner was shit.

ITT: Ah, the backlash comes at last.

>>2426396
...no I mean Nietzsche thought his own attempts at Opera were shit. He thought Wagner was THE shit at first, but probably has a lot to do with falling for Cosima. Super sad:

http://www.nytimes.com/books/99/01/24/reviews/990124.24ryanlt.html

>>2426405
No, he was obsessed with Wagner since he was in his teens. That had nothing to do with Cosima.

And of course he thought his own attempt at Opera was shit, every artist feels that sort of dread towards their own work.

>>2426412
>implying one does not fall out of favour when the other wants to fuck one's bitch
I suppose some of us are unable to understand human emotions though. I feel sorry for you, but you don't understand what that means.

>>2426417
What the fuck are you talking about? And why are you insults to make some point that isn't correct in the first place?

I said his obsession for Wagner was before his love for Cosima.

>>2426420
So am I, what are you disagreeing on then? That Wagner fell out of favour because of Cosima? That Nietzsche knew Cosima?

I wouldn't call it an obsession either, they were like bros basically.

>>2423780
Yup. I completely agree with this. The only person I know who wanks to Nietzsche is a trust-fund babby who has never worked a day in his life and is now 28 years old. He's spent his entire life trying to posture himself as smarter than the people around him, desperately trying to convince himself that he is better for being able to quote Nietzsche at length. He's not.

>>2426423
He was not exactly like bros with Wagner )the two only seen each other a few times), and he quickly fell out with Wagner for a few reasons; one being that Wagner was a huge bigot. He continued to love Cosima, in "secret" and would write to her once and a while. Eventually he would move on to others like Lou.

It was obsession, even many books will describe his interest in Wagner's works as such. It was the music that made Nietzsche interested. It was a huge let down once he realized the man he admired so much was not the type of guy he cared for at all.

>>2426429
Do I know this friend?

>>2426432
>He was not exactly like bros with Wagner )the two only seen each other a few times),
Sorry, that's bullshit. He practically lived with Wagner at one point.

Nietzsche seems pretty fucking bad.

>>2426448
That's because he is. It's still really great to read him and have your mind go through contortions as you try to understand what a fucked up pathetic beta of a man he was. But to live your life in reference to this guy? How about no.jpeg

Get a job, learn to love, be a real human being, and a real hero.

>but then he goes on about the merging of the Apollonian and Dionysian which just reads like mystical pseudo-intellectualism

He probably saw them as psychological phenomena himself.

I don't see the point of this kind of critique though. Mystical? So what. Not everything must be justified by empirical science. It's like the idiots who think Freud is irrelevant today because he's been superseded by more "scientific" psychology and neuroscience, yet they commonly use the words "ego" and "subconscious". So what if you dissect the brain and find no evidence of an ego or and id? That doesn't make them any less useful ideas for explaining and conceptualizing our psychological lives and experiences. Should we restrict our analysis of "Beauty" to the brain scans we have of people looking at artworks? No, because not everything has to be understood empirically, and not everything can explained empirically.
The "Mystical" is a perfectly viable form of discourse so long as we continue to experience things as being mystical.

>>2426447
He visited the couple.

>>2426454
Go fuck off to /tv/.

>>2424190
>Nietzsche constantly talked about becoming primal, will-driven individuals. However, he also was a total loon who frowned upon individuals who weren't fancy, well-cultured, and refined.

>primal, well-driven individuals

These are at odds. You can't be primal and well-driven, because well-driven people's emotions are properly refined and cultured and primal people's are not. Nietzsche never advocated becoming "primal". He advocated Healthiness, and having wild, petty emotions is not healthy.

>>2426454
Great opinion. Well argued. Good job, sir.

>>2426455
...but he never delineates why or how artists are either Apollonian or Dionysian. He just goes on with this assumption without any basis, as if I were to write a book on the basis that people are either inspired by the Iliad or the Odyssey. Sure, I'd probably be able to crank something interesting out, but it wouldn't be at all true and there's no reason why I should assume it.

>>2426459
Cosima helped proofread some of his manuscripts. Richard even defended Nietzsche's work (Birth of Tragedy) along with Erwin Rohde. They also had correspondence for many years.

>>2426467
>These are at odds.
No they are not.

>>2426474
You should read his own critique of the book, "An Attempt at Self-Criticism".

>>2426481
Well if you insult me and I punch you in the face because I am "primal", that means necessarily that I am ill-driven, because well-driven people don't act on mere impulses that wind them up in jail. Well-driven's people are refined such that they don't react to situations in such a self-destructive way. Well-driven are well-driven because they always behave in a way that promotes their own wellbeing and flourishing.

>>2426490
>because well-driven people don't act on mere impulses that wind them up in jail.
I'm sure our basic drives are whether we end up in jail or not.