/lit/ - Literature

[The Goon !vJ.Hyu5Prs No.3019154]

Great book, or greatest book, /lit/?

[Anonymous No.3019163]

>He still takes Nietzsche seriously
Highschool general?

[Anonymous No.3019164]

psh nah, shit was aight doe

[Anonymous No.3019167]

>tfw Nietzsche is the greatest mind of the 19th century by a million billion light years

[The Goon !vJ.Hyu5Prs No.3019166]

>>3019163

Latin honors graduate from Stanford University.

[Anonymous No.3019168]

>God is dead.
>Confusing relligion and God.
>Still thinking the subject of knowlesge can alter the object.

[anonymous No.3019170]

this post is not in the spirit of Zarathusrta. I therefor conclude you have not read it.

[Anonymous No.3019169]

>>3019166
living proof that the Ivy League is just not worth it anymore

[The Goon !vJ.Hyu5Prs No.3019172]

>>3019167

Literacy rates have plummeted even in an era that relies almost exclusively upon written communication via the internet

[Anonymous No.3019177]

the trial and the karamazov brothers and the stranger are much better .

[The Goon !vJ.Hyu5Prs No.3019178]

>>3019168

I didn't say you had to agree with the subject matter.

I said that you should concur that this is either a great book, or the greatest book in the history of literature.

[The Goon !vJ.Hyu5Prs No.3019182]

I'd also suggest this as a valid challenge.

[Anonymous No.3019186]

>>3019178
>I didn't say you had to agree with the subject matter.

Well it isn't as if the quality of the writing itself is top notch...

[Anonymous No.3019187]

>>3019178
Then yeah, I agree it's a really great book even though I don't quite agree with everything he says. I am more of a platonist and a fan of Descartes too; Nietzche was always too angry for my tastes.

[Anonymous No.3019191]

>>3019187
Nietzsche was never angry you fucking piece of shit

[The Goon !vJ.Hyu5Prs No.3019204]

>>3019186

It is. Remember, unless you speak German, you're reading a translation

[Anonymous No.3019206]

>>3019186
Nietzsche is famously an excellent German stylist...

Also, you can find a thinker insightful and constructive without cosigning on every single conclusion he comes to. This is especially true in the case of N where he's launching a whole lot of critiques against a whole lot of things.

[Anonymous No.3019212]

>>3019169
>Stanford University
>Ivy League

I don't know how to say this but...

[Anonymous No.3019214]

>>3019191
When I read twilight of the gods and he's advocating on sensitivity, he then says how idealist are wrong. I remember when I reached that part I said, 'whoa, this guy is angry'.

[Anonymous No.3019218]

i know this token must have been discussed to death, but what would be a good order to read nietzsche in order to understand his works better

[The Goon !vJ.Hyu5Prs No.3019223]

>>3019212

That's perfectly fine. Stanford is technically an Ivy Plus school, like MIT, University of Chicago or Duke, it's not one of the 8 major Ivy League schools

[Anonymous No.3019222]

>In style Stirner's work offers the greatest possible contrast to the puerile, padded phraseology of Nietzsche's "Zarathustra" and its false imagery. Who ever imagined such an unnatural conjuncture as an eagle "toting" a serpent in friendship? which performance is told of in bare words, but nothing comes of it. In Stirner we are treated to an enlivening and earnest discussion addressed to serious minds, and every reader feels that the word is to him, for his instruction and benefit, so far as he has mental independence and courage to take it and use it.

Zarathustra's awright but I've only read the "Thus Spake" translations

[Anonymous No.3019220]

>>3019212
stop being an idiot child

stanford is academically within the top tier of american education and better than several ivy league schools, don't be a pedant about the definition of "ivy league" when it's obviously being used as a synechdoche for "elite American colleges"

[Anonymous No.3019230]

>>3019214
>affected polemic style
>'whoa, this guy is angry'

[Anonymous No.3019232]

>>3019218
there's no order, unless you're a robot.
pick one that piques your interest and/or that is generally recommended as a good starter.

please remember this as it applies to all books.

[The Goon !vJ.Hyu5Prs No.3019236]

>>3019218

Beyond Good and Evil is the most accessible, along with Ecce Homo.

Philosophy in the Tragic Age of the Greeks may be the least accessible of his works.

[Anonymous No.3019240]

>>3019218

>implying anyone on /lit/ had ever read nietzsche

[anonymous No.3019242]

everyone in this thread stfu. This is the greatest book ever written. Everyone who doesn't think so is taking it too literally, therefor not in the spirit of the thing, and no good person gives a fuck what you think.

>mfw you realise the meaninglessness of life

[Anonymous No.3019249]

>>3019167
Nietzsche was aware of this as well, pretty sure he said something along the lines of his greatest misfortune was being born 100 years before his time, and/or that his books will be better understood in a 100 years.

[Anonymous No.3019256]

>>3019218
Read Zarathustra last

Don't expect to be smacked upside the head with deep epiphany unless you're decently read in philosophy, and know its basic history

[anonymous No.3019258]

>>3019249

This thread proves how well people understand Nietzsche 100 years from when he wrote.

[Anonymous No.3019265]

>>3019242
one of the absolute greats agreed
no other book has give me goosebumps/mind melts/other plane nods of agreement so consistently and consecutively

> enlightenment combo all up in there

[Anonymous No.3019268]

>>3019258
booooooosh

(True tho)

[Anonymous No.3019279]

>>3019258
proof Nietzsche had optimistic hope for mankind

imagine if you will how it would've been for him a 100 years ago though

[Anonymous No.3019283]

>>3019258
Exactly. Wouldn't say he's a bad writer though

[Anonymous No.3019285]

>>3019279
Rather, try to imagine if the situation 100 years from now will be any better

[Anonymous No.3019288]

that feel when you haven't rea dhim yet, but hear so much about him

[anonymous No.3019289]

>>3019279

>100 years from now
>Glenn Beck taught in schools

[Anonymous No.3019296]

>>Nietzsche

So where to start with this hack?

[Anonymous No.3019307]

>>3019289
Thank God I'll be dead by then

[Anonymous No.3019306]

>>3019296
You first.

[anonymous No.3019353]

In all seriousness, Nietzsche comes off a bit petulant at times -- particularly in his later work. However every word of Zarathustra rings true in its own way. The first few pages in particular are astounding.

>Zarathustra comes down from his mountain
>wants to share his wisdom
>meets an old man
>old man is like wtf
>old man says Zarathustra idgaf
>don't give anyone anything
>take their burden
>they'll be like totally sweet
>you'll feel good too

fuck those white knights
nobody wants their wisdom.

[Anonymous No.3019400]

>>3019353
What do you mean by petulant? Petulantia can mean impudence (in-pudens, without feeling shame) or pert (from aperio apertus, to open, disclose everything, reveal) to a more sexual meaning, lascivious, a word which has a sexual connotation today, but a wider meaning formerly: L. lascivia "lewdness, playfulness, frolicsomeness, jolity," from lascivus "lewd, playful, frolicsome, wanton," from PIE *las-ko-, from *las- "to be eager, wanton, or unruly" (etymonline.) All of these things harmonise with this subject matter, his style, and his spirit. Another meaning of petulant is insolent from in-solitus - to act in a manner that is un-accustomed, i.e. not part of custom, moral, mores,... all of which fits with his immoralism. How is this objectionable? If his 'petulance' were wrought away from him he would be less consistent with himself.

If you mean 'peevish' and 'irritable' by petulant, I would say that those words don't describe late Nietzsche that well.

[Anonymous No.3019403]

>>3019296
Do you know what a hack is?

[Anonymous No.3019409]

>>3019222
The oldest translation is the best stylistically.

[satan !!1Fa7LzeI6u8 No.3019411]

for a few months now ive been gnoring nietzsche threads due to the general babbys first motherfuckers still wiping their mothers milk from their lips and other such flagellant larvae but it should be said that nietzsche is the titan tier of tiers heralding the reign of our one true god, dionysus, no life for the victim, etc

[anonymous No.3019416]

>>3019400

Throughout Nietzsche, he throws a fit when people don't agree with him. It's as if he fails to recognise that people cannot agree with him because of things other than pure reason. When it comes to his own thinking, he is able to pick apart all the different issues that go into an opinion about the world, but when it comes to criticism of himself, he is unable to respond in a way that takes into account the circumstances of those critiquing him. They cannot agree because it would mean their careers.

That people were a lot more successful than he was while being much less clever, this made him petulant, no?

[Anonymous No.3019418]

>>3019416
& similarly in his personal life, he was notoriously exacting and difficult to be friends with

"petulant" is a perfectly reasonable term, and that's coming from someone who admires or at least sympathizes with nietzsche a whole bunch

[Anonymous No.3019423]

>>3019187
Nietzsche can seem angry, but that is usually with good reason, or it is fitting. If you don't note how his mood or passion harmonises with a passage's spirit then you are an incorrigible dolt. The very point of passion in Nietzsche's work is as a defense of human passion against the etiolatising wrath of the hypocritical preists and ascetic who've 'banished' it from serious and polite discourse.

[satan !!1Fa7LzeI6u8 No.3019425]

>>3019416

post concrete examples and we'll see how they fare; as of right now, youve said nothing of substance

[Anonymous No.3019428]

>>3019423
which is part of the reason why the fucking funniest thing in the world is academic discourse on Nietzsche

[Anonymous No.3019441]

>>3019418
What on earth does it mean? You've only said some very unspecific things about Nietzsche's paroxysms of passion and hate, and about an unspecified critique of himself by others - Nietzsche, however, suffered all his life from nothing if not an extreme lack of critique. So I don't understand what specifically you are referring to.

What do you think petulant means? Could you think of a synonym that is less vague than the tangle of Latin, insolent, petulant, lascivious, impudent, etc. that altogether mean something else, - the roots of the word, I demonstrated above, harmonises beautifully with his philosophy.

Petulant does not mean 'envious.' Voltaire, for example, one of the richest philosophers who ever lived, has often been characterised as 'petulant' in his old age, by which I think some people mean grumpy or cantankerous, which would not be unusual for an old man. It could hardly be said of Voltaire that he had the leisure of envying any of his colleagues as far as amassing material wealth first of all, and latterly that much courted fame, prestige, reputation among Kings and scholars which he so desperately courted in the old French manner.

[Anonymous No.3019444]

>>3019428
Absolutely. I can't bring myself to study philosophy for this very reason: manners haven't changed, in fact, they have gotten worse - broadsiding your colleagues a la Luther or Nietzsche is absolutely impossible, and so you're forced to become a hypocrite. I don't know about you, but I think all this counter-culture freedom has run straight into a concrete wall of backlash, and made the old guard even more guarded, if not indeed younger.

[anonymous No.3019446]

>>3019425

You're not my boss, fuck off.

[Anonymous No.3019448]

>>3019444
Study it, that is, in an academic setting, where one is expected to put forth academic work. There's enough hypocrisy as it is in my life in frivolous things without letting it take over my whole serious side.

[satan !!1Fa7LzeI6u8 No.3019451]

>>3019446

haha whata bitch

[Anonymous No.3019453]

>>3019446
& apparently you're not even the 'boss' of your own usage of the language. You've yet to explain what you think petulant means and what you meant when you used it. Nor have you answered the reply that petulant manners harmonise with Nietzsche's spirit, that it is a virtue of his style, something to be admired, rather than condemned.

[anonymous No.3019458]

>>3019441

Do you honestly not recognise the childishness with which Nietzsche responds to criticism? This is the person who called the first chapter of one of his books 'Why I'm so clever'.

To even have this discussion is beyond stupid. More than anyone else Nietzsche knew what the modern era was about, he is blatantly about the cleverest person who ever lived, but he did have his little fits in plenty of his texts.

Honestly, I wouldn't go and find you quotes unless you paid me, or demonstrated that you could tell me something. Not your personal researcher.

[Anonymous No.3019460]

>>3019441
as far as ... [is concerned]* If you have any idea what you're talking about, I beg you to respond & explain what you mean by 'petulant' specifically.

[satan !!1Fa7LzeI6u8 No.3019464]

>>3019458

it seems as though youre mistaking confidence in ones own titanic righteousness for childishness.
hahahha this is a documented phenomenon among the talentless untermencsch: by projecting their own insignificance on everything they encounter, they can easily dismiss rightfully deserved confidence as "petulant". typical fucking beta reductase cunt youre just reinforcing the stereotype and nietzsche gloats in hell as you squirm livingly, im still waiting for a concrete example...

[Anonymous No.3019467]

>>3019458
Petulance = childishness? I'm not asking for a quote, only a specific reference, in whatever paraphrase you like, or in dactylic hexametres, or whatever, of the specific instances surely lodged in your memory that gave rises to those generalities you spat out above.

'Childishness' is really not a meaningful insult to make against Nietzsche, who is quite content to play the child.

"I name you three metamorphoses of the spirit: how the spirit shall become a camel, and the camel a lion, and the lion at last a child"

If you didn't read Ecce Homo as partly a satire on the genre of autobiography, you missed something.

I feel no need to praise Nietzsche in public, it is a disservice to him, and I frown upon it. He could do with a little less "readers" today.

More than not, it's Nietzsche's admirers often pay him back by reading him critically, and thus, caricaturing him. Reading him critically does not mean barely reading him at all and then tossing out a few words you don't understand to balance the unintelligent praise with unintelligent censure.

If you were wont to ingratiate yourself with anti-Nietzscheans or the indifferent to sell him to them, and your design depended upon calling him 'petulant', a word you don't even understand to its roots, you really should go back and read Nietzsche, you philistine.

[anonymous No.3019473]

>>3019460

I've said already, this is beyond stupid. What's at stake when you're arguing over the definition of a word? I assume that every fucker who speaks english knows what the word means. And as the particularly pedantic commenter above has done, you can go into the history of it. Good for him.

I wouldn't think, for a moment that Nietzsche didn't regret his mistakes. Who else in the history of western thought had such a firm grasp of the workings of a society that presented itself as operating on reasonable principles but displayed in all actions barbaric ones?

Marx arguably. But that's another story.

I would concede in an instant my argument, if it would lead to return to this really juicy, nitty, gritty bit of Nietzsche -- how to go forward, how to live one's life.

But, you know, I think, I've just got this premonition, that isn't going to happen. My friends call me the new Nostradamus. I'm fucking psychic and shit.

[Anonymous No.3019475]

>>3019220
But American Universities are the greatest in the world and far surpass all other nations in term of quality

I bet you're British

[Anonymous No.3019476]

>>3019464
>>3019467

You're both demanding him to give an objective reference point, which is clearly something he cannot do. Just call it a day please. He doesn't know what he is talking about.

[Anonymous No.3019478]

>>3019467
[who] often... [un]critically.

>>3019464
It's true. His childishness is the childishness of an divine grecian god, and I would compare it favourably with the childishness of the brat, who has spoiled himself with more ideas than he can properly handle, using words on /b/ that he doesn't even understand.

[satan !!1Fa7LzeI6u8 No.3019482]

>>3019478

pls leave

[Anonymous No.3019490]

>>3019476
I'm not asking for an 'objective' reference point. We're discussing Nietzsche after all - adjectives like 'objective' and 'subjective' and other Hegelianisms are beyond distasteful.
>>3019473
A lot is at stake in the 'mere' definition of words... probably too much. You do know that right? -- And just listen to this idiot chastising me for pedantry, when Nietzsche, his idol, was a philologist for ***'s sake. His entire work depends on the definition of words. Boiling Nietzsche down to inane lifestyle philosophy is a complete vulgarisation.

[anonymous No.3019498]

>>3019490

But to assume that philology has intrinsic value, that anything has intrinsic value, outside of the circumstances in which it is found, how anti-Nietzschian is that? frowny face.

[anonymous No.3019503]

The rage grows strong in this thread

[Anonymous No.3019513]

>>3019498
There's no mention of intrinsic values in my post. Not presupposed, don't need to be. Your Intrinsic, extrinsic, your whatever, are spatial and geometrical metaphors, and that particular discussion which privileges those metaphors is not morally or philosophically serious.

It is impossible to philosophise as Nietzsche did without philology. Serious philosophy, like serious literature, is dependent upon a serious study of words and their spirit, such as philology.

Finally, the value of Nietzsche's most serious work is not some emancipatory moment in your individual consciousness.

[anonymous No.3019520]

>>3019513

Cool response bro. I'm properly learnt. I was just hanging out to see if anyone on /lit could answer my question about T.E. Lawrence.

They couldn't. So all the best with that and I'm going to fuck my girlfriend now.

Le Nietzxhee ftw!!!! lelelelelellelelelelelelelfetlweltej

[Anonymous No.3019524]

>>3019520
If you want to attack something I've said, or make paranoid inferences about my character, just come out and do it forthright, rather than this wheedling, furtive meme-laced bullshit.

[Anonymous No.3019525]

>>3019164
DOK its you!!! Girls are sex toys made by God to please boys.

[Anonymous No.3019528]

>>3019524
It IS 4chan ya know. 4chan and memes go together like sperm and ova.

[Anonymous No.3019531]

>>3019528
4chan doesn't have any definite character, it changes every moment depending on the posters, and on /lit/ we usually don't suffer the imbecility that people put up with on /b/ etc.