My first Taste

My first encounter with Nietzsche is the book Thus Spoke Zarathustra. Every other page is either covered with notes or underlined sentences. The beginning threw me off because I did not expect to be reading short moral stories, instead I expected to be reading difficult philosophical prose. Even though Nietzsche wrote very simply there were many difficult concepts.

The pattern I noticed while reading Thus Spoke Zarathustra was the pattern of opposites. Zarathustra was prone to give advice that said in order to have a friend one must have an enemy. He speaks of the overman, a state of being more than a person that all humans should be fighting to reach. However the difference in Zarathustra and other prophet-like men is that instead of preaching for a higher state of being, he preaches that a higher state is opposite to what one wants. He says many times we must go "under". He also makes an analogy to that of a tree growing so high, but once the tree reaches its desired height (as in enlightenment for men) the tree is all alone. I found many things that Zarathustra said thought provoking.

It seems as though all the events that occur within the story present a scene for Zarathustra to preach. The tightrope walker and his death, for example, cause him to preach on death. He also states that God is dead. I find this concept humorous but intriguing. It seems that anyone who makes a claim so lofty would have interesting things to back it up. Zarathustra does. The people have very strong reactions to Zarathustra, and I wonder why? Is it fear or belief? Is he seen as a prophet to the people or as a threat? He does not speak of being welcomed but instead it seems as though he is trying to prove himself to them, and to the reader.

Nietzsche subtly attacked the Bible on many accounts. Most notably is when he attacks the sentiment to "love thy neighbor". He presents sages in a different light, one akin to late night infomercials that promise salvation in eight easy steps. There is a sage that promises true sleep in ten minutes. Zarathustra does not heed such advice and neither does he preach such things, and Nietzsche makes the distinction. Zarathustra argues that there is no heaven or God(s), there is only nature and people must worship the earth. Zarathustra's other philosophy seems to travel in circles. I believe he states in each of his stories a belief about the circular thought present in all thoughts. The negative begets the positive, but one must experience the negative first, and then it is possible to have the positive. Each trait that encompasses that good or bad is involved in his teachings.

He disapproves of old statements and beliefs, and he adds a twist to them, almost making the wrong seem right. He attacks basic morality and questions the motives of humans. He makes grand distinctions from what is true and what is self-motivated. It seems as though Zarathustra spends more time demolishing the old ways of thought, than he does erecting new ways.

However, this book still held my interest for longer than I had imagined. Nietzsche had always seemed intangible to me, something that I wouldn't understand. I understood it very well and I think that everyone can come away with something valuable from reading this book.