Is it stupid to like Thus Spake Zarathustra as an unironic work?

Use this philosophy forum to discuss and debate general philosophy topics that don't fit into one of the other categories.

This forum is NOT for factual, informational or scientific questions about philosophy (e.g. "What year was Socrates born?"); such homework-help-style questions can be asked and answered on PhiloPedia: The Philosophy Wiki. If your question is not already answered on the appropriate PhiloPedia page, then see How to Request Content on PhiloPedia to see how to ask your informational question using the wiki.
Post Reply
User avatar
Windrammer
New Trial Member
Posts: 5
Joined: April 14th, 2018, 11:31 pm

Is it stupid to like Thus Spake Zarathustra as an unironic work?

Post by Windrammer » April 14th, 2018, 11:49 pm

Granted I haven't really tread into Nietzsche's philosophy outside of some conversations with people who have, but I'm really enjoying this book. For a while it was completely lost on me that it's supposed to be "comedic" to some degree, although that makes some sense looking back.
It has some silly moments. I just feel like that might actually serve a rhetorical purpose beyond appealing to the humor of the audience of his time. Maybe it just touches my love of fantasy/mythology but so far I've found it kind of rousing to read, and I'm wondering if reading it as if it were a serious work is going to work against me as far as interpretation goes (not that I'd presume to be the one guy to "correctly" interpret it).

Someone reassure me

Fooloso4
Moderator
Posts: 2989
Joined: February 28th, 2014, 4:50 pm

Re: Is it stupid to like Thus Spake Zarathustra as an unironic work?

Post by Fooloso4 » April 15th, 2018, 11:58 am

Windrammer:
For a while it was completely lost on me that it's supposed to be "comedic" to some degree …
It is a comedy in the classic sense. It is made to evoke laughter as opposed to tragedy which evokes sorrow and sympathy. In Nietzsche comedy or levity is the antidote to “the spirit of gravity” (see the section “Three Metamorphoses of the Spirit”), part of the overcoming of the burden that weighs us down, the burden of guilt engendered by “thou shalt”. It is a comedy in that it has a “happy ending”.
I just feel like that might actually serve a rhetorical purpose beyond appealing to the humor of the audience of his time.
Comedy can be serious. It holds a mirror up to life and shows us something about ourselves and others, our weaknesses and folly. There are different types of laughter, from derisive to compassionate. Take note of when Zarathustra laughs.
… and I'm wondering if reading it as if it were a serious work is going to work against me as far as interpretation goes (not that I'd presume to be the one guy to "correctly" interpret it).
It is a very serious work.

Post Reply