Scan barcode
nicktraynor's review against another edition
3.0
I spent more than 10 hours reading these short essays and looking into the various references and allusions that Nietzsche makes throughout. The Case of Wagner, I take it, is a lamentation about what Nietzsche perceived as the decay of society in general and music in particular, embodied by its decadence and nihilism, of which Wagner and Schopenhauer were the artist and philosopher in chief. Nietzsche believes Wagner is a failure because he is not an authentic or great musician, but instead an actor who cynically absorbs and perpetuates the culture of the masses at the expense of original, individual expression and creativity. Wagner apparently does this through his drama and grandiosity in theatrical arrangement and self-referential use of salvation as subject matter. For Nietzsche, Wagner both represents and cultivates the rise of Germanic ideals including nationalism and obedience to the common cause. He ties all this to his conceptions of master and slave moralities (from earlier works), which made a lot of sense in this context. The desire to formulate history as a science, which thinkers such as Marx, Tolstoy and Trotsky also attempted, does seem quaint and futile now though. There were some genuinely thrilling poetical moments as per the best of Nietzsche, but most of it was quite critical and analytical, and there were many of those confounded inconsistencies which are typical of his later writing. The translation was not a good one. It was inelegant at best and very crude at times.
kanjimanji's review against another edition
3.0
Niets (my short for Nietzsche) was a bit of a nut case. His theories—although, at times, vague, tunnel-visioned, or nearly self-contradicting—are undeniable. Mencken breaks them down nicely, especially the notion about the inevitable cross-referential clash of philosophy and art; exquisitely depicted by the interesting friendship between a thinker and a composer (Niets and Wagner).
pizzamcpin3ppl3's review against another edition
challenging
dark
informative
reflective
fast-paced
3.5
kevin_shepherd's review against another edition
4.0
Originally titled “A Psychologist at Leisure,” Nietzsche pummels popular 19th century ideology and icons with exuberance; wielding his denunciations not like a surgeon with a scalpel, but rather like a lumberjack with an axe.
• Nietzsche on theologians:
“Fancy humanity having to take the brain diseases of morbid cobweb-spinners seriously! - And it has paid dearly for having done so.”
“...we recognize no more radical opponents than the theologians, who with their notion of ‘a moral order of things’ still continue to pollute the innocence of Becoming with punishment and guilt. Christianity is the metaphysics of the hangman.”
• Nietzsche on linguistics:
“‘Reason’ in language! - oh what a deceptive old witch it has been! I fear we shall never be rid of God, so long as we still believe in grammar.”
• Nietzsche on the concept of free will:
“...we know only too well what it is - the most egregious theological trick that has ever existed for the purpose of making mankind ‘responsible’ in a theological manner - that is to say, to make mankind dependent upon theologians.”
“The doctrine of the will was invented principally for the purpose of punishment - that is to say, with the intention of tracing guilt. The whole of ancient psychology, or the psychology of the will, is the outcome of the fact that its originators, who were the priests at the head of ancient communities, wanted to create for themselves a right to administer punishments - or the right for God to do so.”
• Nietzsche on Kant:
“The German has no fingers for delicate nuances. The fact that the people of Germany have actually tolerated their philosophers, more particularly that most deformed cripple of ideas that has ever existed - the great Kant - gives no inadequate notion of their native elegance.”
“I bear the Germans a grudge for having made a mistake about Kant and his ‘backstairs philosophy,’ as I call it. Such a man was not the type of intellectual uprightness.”
It’s not all smash & dash. Nietzsche has many good things to say about Hegel, Heinrich Heine, and Schopenhauer; saving his most glowing accolades for Goethe...
“He bore the strongest instincts of this century in his breast: its sentimentality, and idolatry of nature, its anti-historic, idealistic, unreal, and revolutionary spirit”
“...far from liberating himself from life, [Goethe] plunged right into it; he did not give in; he took as much as he could on his own shoulders, and into his heart.”
Nietzsche goes on to call Kant the “antipodes” of Goethe (the Nietzer never squanders an opportunity to kick Kant squarely in the proverbial balls!)
Twilight of the Idols is a hammer to the clay feet of our convictions. This is not on par with The Antichrist, but the gap is not all that large. 4 stars.
• Nietzsche on theologians:
“Fancy humanity having to take the brain diseases of morbid cobweb-spinners seriously! - And it has paid dearly for having done so.”
“...we recognize no more radical opponents than the theologians, who with their notion of ‘a moral order of things’ still continue to pollute the innocence of Becoming with punishment and guilt. Christianity is the metaphysics of the hangman.”
• Nietzsche on linguistics:
“‘Reason’ in language! - oh what a deceptive old witch it has been! I fear we shall never be rid of God, so long as we still believe in grammar.”
• Nietzsche on the concept of free will:
“...we know only too well what it is - the most egregious theological trick that has ever existed for the purpose of making mankind ‘responsible’ in a theological manner - that is to say, to make mankind dependent upon theologians.”
“The doctrine of the will was invented principally for the purpose of punishment - that is to say, with the intention of tracing guilt. The whole of ancient psychology, or the psychology of the will, is the outcome of the fact that its originators, who were the priests at the head of ancient communities, wanted to create for themselves a right to administer punishments - or the right for God to do so.”
• Nietzsche on Kant:
“The German has no fingers for delicate nuances. The fact that the people of Germany have actually tolerated their philosophers, more particularly that most deformed cripple of ideas that has ever existed - the great Kant - gives no inadequate notion of their native elegance.”
“I bear the Germans a grudge for having made a mistake about Kant and his ‘backstairs philosophy,’ as I call it. Such a man was not the type of intellectual uprightness.”
It’s not all smash & dash. Nietzsche has many good things to say about Hegel, Heinrich Heine, and Schopenhauer; saving his most glowing accolades for Goethe...
“He bore the strongest instincts of this century in his breast: its sentimentality, and idolatry of nature, its anti-historic, idealistic, unreal, and revolutionary spirit”
“...far from liberating himself from life, [Goethe] plunged right into it; he did not give in; he took as much as he could on his own shoulders, and into his heart.”
Nietzsche goes on to call Kant the “antipodes” of Goethe (the Nietzer never squanders an opportunity to kick Kant squarely in the proverbial balls!)
Twilight of the Idols is a hammer to the clay feet of our convictions. This is not on par with The Antichrist, but the gap is not all that large. 4 stars.
clayton_sanborn's review against another edition
3.0
Wow, 20th century David Simon was a massive racist. Who could have guessed?
In all seriousness, this book is a very mixed bag. The biographical section is garbage on account of using his sister's biography of him as a primary source, but it is important that this was written only a few years after Nietzsche's death, and the personal and philosophical strain between Friedrich and Elisabeth was not yet public knowledge. The evaluation of Nietzsche's philosophy has some interesting insights, and the chapter on his influences I actually highly recommend reading if you can find it on JSTOR or something similar
In all seriousness, this book is a very mixed bag. The biographical section is garbage on account of using his sister's biography of him as a primary source, but it is important that this was written only a few years after Nietzsche's death, and the personal and philosophical strain between Friedrich and Elisabeth was not yet public knowledge. The evaluation of Nietzsche's philosophy has some interesting insights, and the chapter on his influences I actually highly recommend reading if you can find it on JSTOR or something similar
swankadero's review against another edition
challenging
informative
inspiring
reflective
slow-paced
3.75
it wasn't as fun as the other Nietzsche book I read but anyways, i read it in my linguistics class bc i couldn't concentrate on the course lmao.