“We believe an opera vocalists upon a tone, not a word.”
—F. Nietzsche, Joyful Wisdom
Days of monumental German thinker of Friedrich Nietzsche (15 October 1844 – 25 August 1900), who gave literally the birth to all modern intellectual history in enormous scope without any doubt, signifies essence of fertility of a soul in distress of “feeling well in the crowd.” Total understanding of oneself; himself. — One must love the “crowd” psychology, for to know ‘how to be alone,’ it is to know how to avoid “chamber amount” of people, where you do not feel that free. “‘There are always too-many around me,’ —Thus spoke the hermit.” [F. Nietzsche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra] To the first thought of the “free spirits,” as Nietzsche is in an abundance, European Decadence expressed a great deal; already with Ch. Baudelaire at hand. What Romantic movement brought upon the world was questioning yourself for an ideas, and ideals. Baudelaire brought along (with T. Gautier as his soul-father) something new, as to the “Art for Art’s Sake,” and with this the “Decadent,” all what was excluded form the conventional brought upon itself an utmost difference in a heed for an apprehension. What is therefore “decadent in or upon human?” —Then but now with an overlook from a view of Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche: A different point from an outlook that of a mountain-freezing wind!
From the earliest influenced according to A. Schopenhauer, where later he stated that “all matters of forms, and ideas, systems ‘ideals,’ are absolutely untrue,” and left pessimistic voluntarism aside. Then afterwards his proverbial and crucial turning point “Human, All-too-human” was a breakthrough book by N., for those times he suffered with severe headaches and stomach pains, “his surroundings with potions of such an arrangement, hardly any books, sometimes one letter, but overflowing manuscripts all over,” as S. Zweig described N.’ abodes, when leaving several places of dwelling after finishing his years at University of Basil as the perhaps youngest in head of Classical Philology Department, changed his post of view from all the “idealistical.” And suddenly felt for the “feeling” and what he found as true “himself.” The voice of being faithful the Earth and what “ism” is always categorizable, and his period began to lead into irrationalism, while having an idea that such a matters depends upon his deep struggle with Oidipian Complex, related to his family of religion and roots of behavior for women.
But was it an answer for the path of mankind, or merely a reaction of his private suffocating in suffering of disparate personality “as the perhaps the greatest psychologist we ever had,” as S. Freud mentions of him, or was a provocative innovator and bringing the fresh air onto the individuals of those “free spirits?” —
Doctrine, as even though he as coming form religious family, was unknown to him in his “natural way,” it was something which he has to be doubtful what “Was considered as ‘regular,’ and stated.” It was a solution for say Yes to himself, the liberty for a freedom of choice in maximal possible way, the only one way, ‘Beyond.’ Rebelling to Romanticism & all the conventional — which he sooth as a decline, fall of what was wrong with the culture; and perhaps with his personal life of a lonely man. Stepping our from all the framework of the present & available, as was told about him, “Give any him a work, and he will for sure do it!” It is mostly as if such entire “Genealogy of Morals” bears his works, which the particular book actually covers, was merely also as a wide scope transition, one path of a development for self-criticism, as the Attempt for self-criticism, which sometimes tried to be the best producing moment of N.’s works ever, e. g. his later preface for The Birth of Tragedy, documenting the development of sense of inner perplexity which could be considered as the everlasting hunt for philosophers, “We are all Hyperboreans,” as Pindar stated, and culture is one decline of each of us which is supposed to produce that something more which would be even more uncategorizable than irrationalism, no two ways, but one, and “beyond and within it.” His perhaps greatest attempts were ‘attempts for a self-criticism;’ which his philosophy is actually about.
His imprisonment of a lonely man signifies The Beyond This and That, “Beyond Good and Evil.” This ‘Genealogy of Morals,’ it was a strike of “more than a nihilism,” for nihilism supposedly should have been the latest state of pessimism; therefore all the question which Romanticism produces, types of simple humanity. No stimulants in his life, no cigar after lunch, always a distinctly chosen food from a menu, well-mannered and extremely polite man deeply suffering by abuse of his later fore-sister, who sold his legacy to Nazi Party, and his last unfinished but most profoundly, relatively important work, Will to Power became A. Hitter’s favorite philosophical work all over sudden the latter in the much worse times.
Upon the world of not just purely philosophy —his theories could be applicable upon just… anything— he appeared with his Birth of Tragedy our of Spirit of Music, reaction upon opera composer (better to call music dramas), Richard Wagner and such a comparison he evoked by combining all the naturals convinced by Wagner himself in his conception of “Gesamtkunstwerk,” ‘a total art,’ —somewhat translated into English, in N.’s view it was a combining The Dionysian intoxication of music with Apollonian “statue-like” art, and then also it interluded his philosophy throughout rest of his life with variety of angles. We cannot omit his private change which came alive with “Human, All-Too-Human,” through “Beyond Good and Evil,” “Twilight of Idols,” or autobiographical sketch “Ecce Homo.” How to ‘philosophize with a hammer’ was his life, and present days in question as he mirrored and framed in his Zarathustra and already in his “Joyful Wisdom,” matters of Overcoming, and question of the Eternal Return I wish to speak more clearly for now I see its utmost profoundity.
Nietzsche was attempting to capture all that mentioned decadence, if we can call it that way, for in his world nothing is having certain name, it is ‘himself:’ a concept of his own and for his own sake. In the overwhelming power of Christianity as a Doctrine of “commands,” strong impulse of an Oidipian Complex for instance manifested by his relationship to Cosima Wagner, since he found a second father in R. Wagner, dogma or anything alike “those” & “this” is out from his picture. One of his major aims then was to make a break through form only to the way of / for the “right path,” as to not to “yeas” and “no,” not even to “invent,” (another paradox which could be understood later) but be faithful to what “is not even in the middle,” but the essentially real ONE way, to form of the only one way out from “Good and Evil,” path burning from Dionysian and Apollonian as a phoenix of his pre-mature classical philology years, to maximizing will power, which is supposed to be— as if the Beyond was an outcry for solution for his interpersonal struggle with the surrounding, self-realization, and an answer for Romantics and all the ideals, as I will reveal the latter. Perhaps a dependence upon himself; what was not himself.
What he ever meant by “overcoming” was a spiritual & habitual inconsistency of all the ‘Natural’ in human with that what seized him in his non-habitual manners. “To overcome” is meant to be forcefully reawaken the past with the present of “never repeating the same moment,” for same as the “eternal reoccurrence” there is a “Demon coming into the one’s life’s bedroom, with a nightmare of repentance of atavism of each moment of his life with greatest with the last outstanding smallest moment of all the decadent; this time all the low tendency in human.” Such was the treatment of “always improve oneself,” in order to “not be ashamed of the ape of man, for “man is an ape, as any other ape, even more than an ape,” as Zarathustra, Nietzsche’s alert-ego prophetizes. One must be a sea to comprehend the nature of man in order to strive for more, to put after himself much more than he is himself is at the moment and even at this very such a moment “he needs to be more than that moment, and on top of all, be conscious of in at once.” Thus a treatment of all the unnatural and saying, “yes” to suffering, yeas, to misery for such is the “gift-giving virtue,”” which will bring that “Much more fruits,” as the Bible says, for you ought to ‘die to live by a regaining your life,’ spiritually. “I do not give any alms, for I am not poor enough.” [F. N., Thus Spoke Zarathustra.]
In other words the psychology is all very close with the Bible in certain paradoxes. His aphoristic writing, full of symbols, poems, Dithyrambs are one of stylistically most beautiful philosophical writing the western culture ever produced. Some sense of S. Kierkegaard can be felt, only the opposite dwells in complete exclusion from Christianity. Paradoxes led his mind flow as only one possible way of self-realization. Most likely Nietzsche felt his own fate and to handle that his own way, as far as understanding himself so well— as if his philosophy was so well manifested, all the progress, personal phenomenology, evolution (only not Darwin!), as in his private life culminating in a moment when he could not compose few sensible words together into one sentence. Not to say or to elicit anything to his sad end, just to express that most likely “to live your own philosophy,” like the categorical imperative held by I. Kant, or Cartesian Questions of R. Descartes— one must incline to development, and most likely it’s a development of your own self, and only inside yourself, as Hegel would argue, same was the case of Nietzsche’s.
A complete abandonment of Christianity and be “Beyond Yeas and Neys,” abandoning basic roots meets hand in hand with then moment of “loose losing,” “Death of God by 'killing him by our own common and mutual' existence,” as if saying, “Who's moving my hand at the moment? — It is me, myself and nobody or anything else.” And he might have been such a case. Deeply excluded also form his human roots of not only family, in general in such an urgency. I find his inflect very prophetic especially in understanding yourself and find your inner reconciliation with yourself absolutely. If I look upon present days, we do not have anything that “impressive,” or outstanding, so innovative or even “deliriously imperative” as his “Overman,” a certain imaginative archetypal being to come after man, siren: “Man is a rope between an ape and a Superman.” Understand the unattainable is undertaking of oneself same as the more than the time you are living in. One only ought to dive in himself and “live for his own thought” and devotion(s). Most of essential birth of all existentialism (Sartre, Camus, or e. g. F. Kafka in literature-beletry) comes from his legacy, same as further phenomenalism, objectivism (Ayn Rand)— therefore also many economical theories we cannot to eliminate from the exposure. Birth of absurditism, irrationalism and times of revealing more than a ‘pure chaos’ than Plato’s forms and ideas came into the living possession of mankind. As if Aristotle found the transcendental moment of transiency; as if he himself posing as before the only one opposite of sound from Socrates, archetype and souls sustained form varieties of a multi-approachment lost his seat, in order to let the world to the absolute free will & free thought more than ever. But such a emptive & after all themselves a very stimulative thinkers as F. W. N., are rather more than falsity to be interpreted and widely being misconcepted, used and most of all completely misunderstood as it happens frequently in popular world.