/lit/ - Literature

You have to remember that in Dante's Inferno, most of the people mentioned were people alive back then that have no significance whatsoever. To people back then, it was hilarious. To us now, it is just strange. It is a satire

You need to go less deeper. Shallower, if you will. Sophie's World.

>>3190647
This is why you should get an edition with good footnotes.

Trying to read Nietzsche before you've read and understood at least the Greeks is a mistake; you won't understand him.

The issue with Dante could be the specific translation you're reading. Do research into different translations of foreign texts before settling on one.

>>3190646
>>3190650
So I should just build up to Nietzsche instead of jumping right into it? What would you guys recommend besides Sophie's World?

>>3190651

Dante's Inferno is like reading Paradise Lost but with a million inside jokes.

>>3190659
and the devil is a total loser asshole in Dante's inferno.

You sound like someone who doesn't read much. (no offense intended)

Start from small. Read young adult classics like Moby Dick, Catcher in Rye, Gatsby, etc etc.

You can't expect a new violinist to play Paganini in the first weeks.

Or a new tennis player to beat Federer.

We all start small, no matter how big we are, and there's no shame in that. So long as you don't stop and give up.

>>3190661

A loser, HAIRY asshole.

>>3190664
>You sound like someone who doesn't read much.
I haven't. I've been trying to read more though. I'll check the sticky on the first page and start reading. Thanks guys.

They have various editions of both Inferno and works by Nietzsche, you may have picked up the more difficult ones.

Thus Spoke Zarathustra is easier to comprehend than other of Nietzsches' work, but it depends how much you want to pick it apart.
Inferno can be tricky, but after a few cantos you become attuned to it. Other than missing out on several references, you shouldn't have that much trouble. The names and locations don't really matter. The first time I read it, my version had footnotes which did not add very much to the overall enjoyment of the story. Don't give up on it that easily and re read what you don't get the first time around

>>3190684
>Thus Spoke Zarathustra is easier to comprehend than other of Nietzsches' work
You've blown your cover, you haven't read any Nietzsche.

>>3190679
Good luck OP! Philosophical texts are pretty dense. Start with some basic and accessible works and move upwards, the trip will be totally work it.

>can't understand Nietzsche

I'm afraid to say that you are certainly a plebe. He's a joy to read.

>>3190690
nope. compared to Birth of a Tragedy, The Will to Power, and some of Human, all too Human, Thus Spoke Zarathustra was not very difficult. As I said, it depends on how deeply you want to pick it apart.
Those books by Nietzsche are all I've read, although I've read different translations.

>>3190699
The ones I picked up were Beyond Good and Evil and The Antichrist

>>3190643

>plebeian

We don't want this mentality here. At all.
Kindly stop or just go back to /mu/ and /tv/.

>>3190709
The Antichrist will be my next read once I've finished HUman, All Too Human

>>3190658
>So I should just build up to Nietzsche instead of jumping right into it?

Yeah. Honestly, though, he's overhyped.

>What would you guys recommend besides Sophie's World?

Just read as much Plato and Aristotle as you can get your hands on.

>>3190643
You need to have read and understood greek philosophy, Kant, Hegel and Schopenhauer to understand what Nietzsche is constantly referencing. A lot of the time he is attacking Kant which you wouldn't pick up on unless you knew about Kant's philosophy.

You would also need to know about ancient greek culture, because that's what he wants European culture to go back to. He's essentially a pagan, he wants Europeans to embrace the ancient greek ideal.

>that feel when you read some highfalutin philosophy shit that expects fluency and familiarity in Latin, Greek, the Bible, history, and classical and medieval literature and philosophy
>that feel when you get all 14 layers of it and it's like you're Vulcan mind melding with Nietzsche while he gently cups your balls

>>3190711
>We don't want this mentality here
That has always been part of /lit/, quit acting like you speak for all of us faggot pleb.

>>3190699
>compared to Birth of a Tragedy, The Will to Power, and some of Human, all too Human, Thus Spoke Zarathustra was not very difficult.
Birth of a Tragedy is one of his easiest works to understand, Will to Power and Human, All to Human are easier than TSZ. Unless you've read through nearly every prerequisite thinker for Nietzsche TSZ is going to go way over your head. It has nothing to do with "going deeper" or whatever.

>>3190711
new here

depends on the nietzsche.

will to power makes fuck shit sense.

>>3190720
No it hasn't, but nonetheless as OP reads more he will shed the idiocy that is common to /mu/ and /tv/. Read more OP.

>>3190727
Huh... Well, I guess it will vary. I read Birth of a Tragedy a long time ago, before I knew much of anything about philosophy, which likely has something to do with why I struggled so much with it.
I still maintain that TSZ was not very difficult to understand... although from discussing it with an old teacher of mine I got a lot out of it that he didn't agree with, despite grasping a good part of it. Oh well

>>3190711
Fuck off and hide this thread if you don't like it so much. None of us jumped straight into Nietzsche or postmodernism or anything else, you start out small a build bigger. At least this kid is fucking interested in reading.

>>3190760
You and the teacher no doubt missed many of the references in TSZ, it's not an explicit work at all. Also, BoT isn't really philosophy, it's drama and history.

>>3190699

TWtP is the conceptually densest Nietzsche there is. You have to have read pretty much everything else he wrote to get it, plus read secondary material so you can put it in perspective since it was edited so disingenuously.

I'd agree that TSZ is among the more difficult, though, especially with the aphoristic style.

>>3190767
I didn't even know what a Dionysian or Apollonian was when I originally picked it up, so yea, I can understand OPs plight.

>>3190771
That's a binary Nietzsche invented, so it's not big thing.

>>3190778
Not at all. We spent three classes contrasting the two. Others have also borrowed the concept and elaborated on it.

>>3190788
I mean not knowing of it, not it's effect. It's a bit like saying "I didn't even know what deconstruction was before I read Derrida".

OP, can you cite specifically what you're having problems understanding?

>>3190795
I guess I'm just not used to the style. The sentences seem to never end and it's difficult for me to absorb all the ideas. And Nietzche seems to jump all over the place when explaining one idea so it is hard to focus. I guess I do need to work my way up.

>>3190720

>That has always been part of /lit/

No it hasn't. Are you new?

>>3190765

>Fuck off and hide this thread if you don't like it so much.

I never said I didn't like the thread. I saged because I was posting without directly contributing - this is how a sage works.

Go back to /mu/ and /tv/ if you want to circlejerk these kind of vacuous buzzwords.