2 Answers

  1. I read Zarathustra for the first time, I think, when I was 14 years old, and I thought that it was a mortal melancholy.�

    A friend of mine from high school eagerly talked about it and praised it, while wondering why everyone around them didn't read it. He did this so loudly that the history teacher, who for some reason stayed in class during recess, decided to also loudly remark that everyone around her did not read it because Nietzsche was the prophet of fascism.

    The PR campaign was a success, so I started reading as soon as I got home. And when I finished, I noticed that I felt nothing but boredom. I decided to try something different and mastered “Human, too human”. It was just as depressing as Zarathustra, but I liked The Wanderer and His Shadow separately.�

    Now I think that “Human, too human” is fun, but “Wanderer” is melancholy.

    After that, I read Zarathustra twice, four years apart. First separately, and then as part of 4 volumes of collected works. And after the last reading, I was convinced that this is the most uninteresting book. And one of Nietzsche's major creative failures.

  2. I remember reading this book in my second year of university, primarily because I was friends with a girl who was interested in philosophy. )
    Feelings? Well something like this: “So what? Where is the storehouse of brilliant, shocking and bold thoughts? There are even more of them in mascult.”
    The problem with all philosophers is that they are bad writers. On the other hand, a good writer is always an unconscious philosopher. Something like that. Yes, and philosophy itself, as a discipline, would not be bad if there were more dry scientific content and less verbiage.

Leave a Reply