Take a photo of a barcode or cover
4.15 AVERAGE
4.15 AVERAGE
informative
reflective
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
The doctor Breuer and Nietzsche are set up to meet by a previous love interest of the last. The plot covers lightly the struggles in Nietzsche's mental health but is mainly a description of the early days of psychology; whilst giving an insight into the social scene of the 19th century doctors.
challenging
dark
emotional
reflective
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Sometimes it gets a little tiring , but mostly it is pure genius .
challenging
dark
emotional
hopeful
informative
inspiring
reflective
slow-paced
Plot of no action yet fascinating inner developments.
Also mixed historicity demands awareness of fiction vs facts (usual payoff for the genre).
It was like an intro to psychoanalysis to me. Never considered it seriously before.
Also mixed historicity demands awareness of fiction vs facts (usual payoff for the genre).
It was like an intro to psychoanalysis to me. Never considered it seriously before.
This is one of my favorite books. It is not only a book about philosophy vs. psychology. It is about the fight to not give up on the mind, as Nietzsche denies constantly that their is anything wrong with him outside of his physical symptoms. This book help us to understand how to think about the people that we just can't understand.
This work fails in several ways. Firstly, it fails as a historical novel. Its characters view their places in history from the neatly organised perspective that is the luxury of modern hindsight. Secondly, its stilted, expository style is only surpassed by [a:Plato|879|Plato|https://d202m5krfqbpi5.cloudfront.net/authors/1353468250p2/879.jpg]'s dialogues, and not even by far. If showing instead of telling is the hallmark of great narrative art, this book fails the test. Thirdly, the characters are flattened mouthpieces for the points Yalom wants to make: despite their philosophical and social differences, their mannerisms and speech are virtually identical.
Still, [b:When Nietzsche Wept|21031|When Nietzsche Wept|Irvin D. Yalom|https://d202m5krfqbpi5.cloudfront.net/books/1348795851s/21031.jpg|162267] is great. While any philosophy student can create a synthesis between existentialism and psychoanalytical theory, Yalom makes it seem as if the two are twins separated a birth. Throughout the dialogues between Breuer and Nietzsche, the reader meets central themes of their respective philosophies and and is persuaded to see them as deeply connected.
In fact, while all dialogue seems contrived and is way too explicit - a fact only marginally excused by the psychotherapeutical setting that is the premise of the story - deeper ties between Nietzsche's philosophy and psychoanalysis are more craftfully inserted into the story. For example, similarities between Nietzschean slave morality and [a:Freudian|10017|Sigmund Freud|https://d202m5krfqbpi5.cloudfront.net/authors/1291158417p2/10017.jpg] criticism of civilization itself -- as espoused in [b:Civilization and Its Discontents|357636|Civilization and Its Discontents|Sigmund Freud|https://d202m5krfqbpi5.cloudfront.net/books/1347581113s/357636.jpg|848942] -- are touched upon, but never elaborated. Similarly, parallels between Nietzsche's views on power and the peculiar relationship between psychotherapists and their patients are shown, not told. While When Nietzsche Wept lacks virtually all subtlety at the narrative level, it is very playful at a more thematic one.
Part of this playfulness stems from Yalom's comfort in weaving Nietzsche's aphorisms through the dialogues, while borrowing psychoanalytical insights from across history -- even from days way beyond those of Breuer's. It also comes from the way he approaches the Freudian concepts towards which the book is heavily biased. A therapist who is a patient, but transfers that state upon a patient who acts as his therapist and completely mirrors this, would probably be the most confusing case study ever, defying all attempts to be neatly categorized in the psychoanalytical framework. This tongue-in-cheek approach makes up for shoehorning skeptical Nietzsche into the role of an explorer of the subconscious, something he, who once mocked [a:Eduard Von Hartmann|12849|Eduard Von Hartmann|https://d202m5krfqbpi5.cloudfront.net/authors/1377212875p2/12849.jpg] for explaining something that cannot be known by essence, would probably have rejected with nihilistic passion.
The beauty of When Nietzsche Wept is not its poor style or lackluster imagination in portraying characters at the dawn of Vienna 1900. It is the excited synthesis that permeates the pages of the book, a synthesis that you cannot help but be dragged along with. Sometimes the synthesis is spelled out, while some of the more abstruse connections are left to the reader. The result is a work that is esoteric at heart, but in a way that simply scales with initiation.
Still, [b:When Nietzsche Wept|21031|When Nietzsche Wept|Irvin D. Yalom|https://d202m5krfqbpi5.cloudfront.net/books/1348795851s/21031.jpg|162267] is great. While any philosophy student can create a synthesis between existentialism and psychoanalytical theory, Yalom makes it seem as if the two are twins separated a birth. Throughout the dialogues between Breuer and Nietzsche, the reader meets central themes of their respective philosophies and and is persuaded to see them as deeply connected.
In fact, while all dialogue seems contrived and is way too explicit - a fact only marginally excused by the psychotherapeutical setting that is the premise of the story - deeper ties between Nietzsche's philosophy and psychoanalysis are more craftfully inserted into the story. For example, similarities between Nietzschean slave morality and [a:Freudian|10017|Sigmund Freud|https://d202m5krfqbpi5.cloudfront.net/authors/1291158417p2/10017.jpg] criticism of civilization itself -- as espoused in [b:Civilization and Its Discontents|357636|Civilization and Its Discontents|Sigmund Freud|https://d202m5krfqbpi5.cloudfront.net/books/1347581113s/357636.jpg|848942] -- are touched upon, but never elaborated. Similarly, parallels between Nietzsche's views on power and the peculiar relationship between psychotherapists and their patients are shown, not told. While When Nietzsche Wept lacks virtually all subtlety at the narrative level, it is very playful at a more thematic one.
Part of this playfulness stems from Yalom's comfort in weaving Nietzsche's aphorisms through the dialogues, while borrowing psychoanalytical insights from across history -- even from days way beyond those of Breuer's. It also comes from the way he approaches the Freudian concepts towards which the book is heavily biased. A therapist who is a patient, but transfers that state upon a patient who acts as his therapist and completely mirrors this, would probably be the most confusing case study ever, defying all attempts to be neatly categorized in the psychoanalytical framework. This tongue-in-cheek approach makes up for shoehorning skeptical Nietzsche into the role of an explorer of the subconscious, something he, who once mocked [a:Eduard Von Hartmann|12849|Eduard Von Hartmann|https://d202m5krfqbpi5.cloudfront.net/authors/1377212875p2/12849.jpg] for explaining something that cannot be known by essence, would probably have rejected with nihilistic passion.
The beauty of When Nietzsche Wept is not its poor style or lackluster imagination in portraying characters at the dawn of Vienna 1900. It is the excited synthesis that permeates the pages of the book, a synthesis that you cannot help but be dragged along with. Sometimes the synthesis is spelled out, while some of the more abstruse connections are left to the reader. The result is a work that is esoteric at heart, but in a way that simply scales with initiation.
funny
hopeful
inspiring
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
3.5 stars.
What would have happened if it was Nietzsche, not Freud, who first coined the idea of psychotherapy? From that idea the alternative history in this book is born. With himself as both patient and therapist, in the depths of Vienna, Nietzsche tries to use philosophy to grapple with the every-day depressions of renowned physician Josef Breuer. At the same time, Breuer attempts to heal Nietzsche of his suicidal thoughts under the guise of treating his migraine.
Which is a fancy way of saying it's a book of conversations between two white dudes. As horrible as that sounds, the beautiful clarity of the writing and the strong distinct voice of the two characters, alongside the fascinating philosophy makes it a surprisingly grappling read.
That being said, from hypnosis (or mesmerism, as it is called here) to talking therapy and even the first seeds of psychoanalysis, this book goes into pop psychology in a way that I suspect would be interesting to someone unfamiliar with the topics, but that makes me, as a psychology student slightly uncomfortable. I just have an image of people reading this book and imagining this idea of healing through human connection to still be what psychology strives for. (It isn't.) It makes me wonder if someone more educated about philosophy than myself would similarly take offence at the philosophical aspects of it, but I have no way to know.
What would have happened if it was Nietzsche, not Freud, who first coined the idea of psychotherapy? From that idea the alternative history in this book is born. With himself as both patient and therapist, in the depths of Vienna, Nietzsche tries to use philosophy to grapple with the every-day depressions of renowned physician Josef Breuer. At the same time, Breuer attempts to heal Nietzsche of his suicidal thoughts under the guise of treating his migraine.
Which is a fancy way of saying it's a book of conversations between two white dudes. As horrible as that sounds, the beautiful clarity of the writing and the strong distinct voice of the two characters, alongside the fascinating philosophy makes it a surprisingly grappling read.
That being said, from hypnosis (or mesmerism, as it is called here) to talking therapy and even the first seeds of psychoanalysis, this book goes into pop psychology in a way that I suspect would be interesting to someone unfamiliar with the topics, but that makes me, as a psychology student slightly uncomfortable. I just have an image of people reading this book and imagining this idea of healing through human connection to still be what psychology strives for. (It isn't.) It makes me wonder if someone more educated about philosophy than myself would similarly take offence at the philosophical aspects of it, but I have no way to know.