The Birth of Tragedy

Being a philosophy minor in college, I think that I understood about half of this book. Here are some things to know before taking the leap.

1.Nietzsche discusses writers that were around hundred years ago or more that most people today are not familiar with.
2.A few passages in the book are clearly misogynistic.
3.Nietzsche's writing can be long-winded and convoluted at times, though it shows that his work was inspired from deep within him, and is not a bland logical conclusion derived from boring facts.
4.Nietzsche calls out scholar philosophers for being pedantic children that argue about semantics more than anything.
5. Sociologists will see parallels in Nietzsche's writings, and celebrated social theory that was coined decades later.

In conclusion, its a good book to read if you are more into applied philosophy, existentialism, or humanism. But don't make it your bible. Even Nietzsche would admit that he wasn't perfect, and was constantly changing and learning even after his words were immortalized.

A question that I have seen brought up by several reviewers here at the store is the question of the relation between 'Thus Spoke Zarathustra' and 'Beyond Good and Evil'. Now, this is, in my humble opinion, one of the most difficult interpretational problems that Nietzschean scholarship could ever wrestle with. But scholarship (naturally) barely recognizes that the problem even exists! In this brief review of BGE it is this relationship that I would like to focus on. And, as is so often the case in Nietzsche interpretation, it is to Nietzsche himself that we must turn for our guidance:

"When you consider that this book followed after Zarathustra, you may perhaps also guess the dietetic regimen to which it owes its origin. The eye that had been spoiled by the tremendous need for seeing far--Zarathustra is even more far-sighted than the Czar-- is here forced to focus on what lies nearest, the age, the around-us. In every respect, above all also in the form, you will find the same deliberate turning away from the instincts that had made possible a Zarathustra. The refinement in form, in intention, in the art of silence is in the foreground; psychology is practiced with admitted hardness and cruelty--the book is devoid of any good-natured word.
All this is a recuperation: who would guess after all what sort of recuperation such a squandering of good-naturedness as Zarathustra represents makes necessary?
Theologically speaking--listen closely, for I rarely speak as a theologian--it was God himself who at the end of his day's work lay down as a serpent under the tree of knowledge: thus he recuperated from being God - He had made everything too beautiful. The devil is merely the leisure of God on that seventh day ..." (from 'Ecce Homo', the conclusion of the chapter entitled 'Beyond Good and Evil'.)

Thus it is Nietzsche himself who draws our attention to the difference between BGE and Z and not merely some scholarly fancy. Now, exactly what does Nietzsche here indicate about this difference? (Always keep in mind that BGE is the book that immediately followed Zarathustra in the Nietzschean canon.) Zarathustra is a vision that endures, that is intended by its author to endure, while BGE concentrates on the times, on 'current affairs'. Thus one imagines that BGE will eventually be forgotten or ignored and that this is indeed the authors exact intention. Regarding BGE Nietzsche draws our attention to its refinement in form, intention and the 'art of silence'. Was Zarathustra not so refined? He immediately adds that (in BGE) "psychology is practiced with admitted hardness and cruelty--the book is devoid of any good-natured word." Perhaps he means to indicate that psychology was not at all practiced in Zarathustra? Or perhaps he merely means to indicate that the psychology practiced in Zarathustra was not hard or cruel. Nietzsche, in the penultimate sentence of the first chapter of BGE, famously proclaims that Psychology is once again the Queen of the Sciences. ...Perhaps this proclamation is itself an example of this hardness and cruelty?

Be that as it may, Nietzsche then tells us that BGE was a recuperation (for him) from the squandering of good-naturedness that Zarathustra requires. Then, as capstone to this brief chapter explicating BGE, Nietzsche does something quite remarkable - he speaks theologically! (The age of parables is perhaps not as dead as the Zeitgeist assumes.) He tells us that the serpent in Eden was actually God. God does this because "He had made everything too beautiful." ...A frighteningly pretty fable. But what has this to do with Nietzsche's understanding of BGE?

First a few words on the theological parable Nietzsche here tells. The serpent, of course, is the one that convinces Eve to eat the fruit from the tree of knowledge. (Note that the tree of knowledge had always been in Paradise, it is not foreign to Paradise, thus it is not merely a part of the 'recuperation of God'.) But this feast of knowledge, like all feasts (alas), had consequences: the consequences being the expulsion of Adam and Eve from Paradise. This last cannot be overestimated: knowledge destroys all these "too beautiful" paradises. In Nietzsche's parable, of course, there is no devil -he is "merely the leisure of God"- thus God both made and, according to this parable of Nietzsche, then willfully destroyed Paradise.

Okay, but what exactly does this have to do with the relation between BGE and Zarathustra? At the beginning of the above quoted section of 'Ecce Homo' Nietzsche had referred to the time prior to his writing BGE as the 'Yes-saying' part of his task, then came the 'No-saying' part. (As stated earlier, BGE is the book that Nietzsche wrote after Zarathustra.) We now understand that BGE is the No-saying part while Zarathustra was the Yes-saying part of Nietzsche's task. Now the theological parable Nietzsche tells in Ecce Homo becomes clear. Paradise, the 'too beautiful' paradise, is Zarathustra while the 'tree of knowledge' is BGE. Nietzsche, of course, is the serpent/God that creates both paradise and the knowledge that eventually destroys it. ...And we readers of Nietzsche? Perhaps we are intended to enjoy the fruits of the Zarathustrian Paradise that the 'God' Nietzsche surely intends to build - but only for a while. One day Knowledge, knowledge that (the 'serpent') Nietzsche so 'devilishly' indicates in BGE, will destroy this 'Paradise' too.

Assuming, for the sake of argument, that this interpretation of Nietzsche's gnomic remarks in Ecce Homo is essentially correct - why would Nietzsche (eventually) want to destroy the world he intends to make? Hmmm... Let's review our (Nietzschean) History. After the legendary fiasco in (the Christian) Paradise humanity was expelled and had to build for itself a new world. And now, after the prophesied (by Nietzsche) destruction of Christianity and modernity (these 'Platonisms for the People') comes to pass --well, what? We get to build and live in the new (Nietzschean) Zarathustrian world, another 'too beautiful' paradise. And later, after BGE, the tree of knowledge that lives unnoticed in the heart of the Nietzschean/Zarathustrian paradise, is finally 'discovered' and fully devoured (i.e., read correctly) and thus destroys that paradise-- what then? Well, one imagines that some new God (or, far more likely, some new philosopher) builds a new world. WHAT?!? Can you say Eternal Return of the Same? Oh, I just knew you could...

Now, it would take another review to even begin to indicate why Nietzsche makes his world - briefly, he does so as an affirmation of life. And one suspects that, for Nietzsche, destruction itself is but a moment within affirmation. It is in this manner that we can now suggest that the 'tree of knowledge' (i.e., BGE), the No-saying part of Nietzsche's work, is only but a moment in an even greater affirmation. This is without a doubt one of the most profound books in the history of philosophy. The fact that it reads so easily is but another example of its merciless psychology: its readers mistakenly stop at the far too beautiful surface.

But it is in the fearsome depths that the philosopher Nietzsche hides.

Just so you know, THIS particular copy of The Birth of Tragedy is NOT split up into the chapters. It's just continuous text all the way through. This is not much of a problem for the recreational reader, but as I am a student, I had to know exactly which portions to focus on. I had to find a text copy online so I knew where to write the numbers. The cover looks like it was made MS Paint too...

I have just recently started reading this book. It was a bit different from what I thought I was getting. A bit of a heavy read but still an excellent book.

This book took a while to get me, but arrived before its estimated arrival time.

Since not yet completing this book I don't have much to say at this time.

ThankYou

I have always appreciated the Walter Kaufmann translations of Friedrich Nietzsche's writings. This specific volume is no exception. Anyone who has attempted to translate the original text themselves knows the difficulties inherent in Nietzsche's prose make this no small task. The importance of "The Birth of Tragedy" to modern cultural studies cannot be understressed. It has become almost matter of fact to see the Apollonian-Dionysian conflict as the motive force behind the development of human civilization. Neo-Freudian theory echoes the themes the young philologist saw within the remnants of Greek tragedy's legacy to western culture; ordering form coating the abyssmal depth of primal abandon. The brilliant insight that Nietzsche uncovers wherein the tragic chorus erases the artifical barrier modernity has instituted between stage and audience has been contested by some mainstream historians of Greek literature. Nevertheless, the truth of his insight isn't dependent upon the factuality of scholarly assent but, rather, stands on the range of clarity it provides to those looking through its lense. "The Case of Wagner" gives the reader an opportunity to peek into Nietzsche's personal struggle with genius both personally and in another, a dance of projected self-loathing. The decadence of modernity and mass appeal are woven into a argument against redemption and Christian ethics which Nietzsche locates as central to Wagner's musicality. The author is razor sharp in turning a phrase and difficult, perhaps purposely so, to doctinize. In any case, these two writings are essential for anyone wishing to glimpse into the vision of this transitional philosopher who is best known for announcing the death of God.

This book was printed the day i purchased it. There is no publishing company of a page which has such details. The cover is horrible. The picture is so over stretched that you can see the pixels. The cover lookalike something a 5 year old designed on word. Overall it looks like the seller just printed a pdf made it into a book.

This book is astoundingly insightful in places, perhaps I failed to properly comprehend the insight in others. Many of the ideas presented in this book are existentially terrifying when contemplated deeply. The Translator Walter Kaufmann has done a good job annotating certain key sections of the work, also providing excerpts from texts to which Nietzsche makes reference.

The book is not perfect, for most of the book I could not shake the feeling that Nietzsche was building to some grand conclusion, perhaps this was simply my own misunderstanding of the text but I was left feeling slightly let down when I finally set the book down. It is on account of my own let down feeling that I have deducted a star.

The book was insightful enough and significantly difficult to comprehend (due to the complexity of the ideas being presented, not any flaw in text) that I will almost certainly find myself giving it a second read in the future.

Nietzsche looks at life and characterizes it without blinking. Not that his philosophy is particularily USEFUL; essentially, you have to come up with your own. He has no answers, poses no real questions, and simply posits that the man of the future will make his own answers to the questions that he finds.

Some parts of this are actually funny, such as his characterizations of the nations. Nobody comes off completely flattered, but the English get it worst!

My favorite part is probably the thoughtfully collected section of aphorisms. Nietzsche was a master of these, knew it, and served them up like some sumptuous dessert in the middle of a formal meal.

Nietzsche looks at life and characterizes it without blinking. Not that his philosophy is particularily USEFUL; essentially, you have to come up with your own. He has no answers, poses no real questions, and simply posits that the man of the future will make his own answers to the questions that he finds.

Some parts of this are actually funny, such as his characterizations of the nations. Nobody comes off completely flattered, but the English get it worst!

My favorite part is probably the thoughtfully collected section of aphorisms. Nietzsche was a master of these, knew it, and served them up like some sumptuous dessert in the middle of a formal meal.

Same Old Tragedy. To be able to project beyond cultural boundaries the reaches of Greek culture is the gift of Nietzche. He could have titled it The Birth of Pleasure and it would stick. I like it that it makes me think and imagine. We probably still live with mythical gods. We just call them by a different name.

The time and the space allotted for writing this review are both not sufficient to do justice to Nietzsche. I have a read a lot of Nietzsche and other commentary on his work. I have only two things to say. (1) Unless you can read German, always read a Walter Kaufmann translation of Nietzsche. DO NOT read any other translation. There are many translations available out there but Kaufmann's translations are the most authentic. (2) I purchased by book 'used' figuring just how used could it be. It turned out, when the book arrived, that it was untouched. Literally. Not a single mark on the book. And it arrived within a week or so.

I was extremely satisfied with the quality of the book. And as for contents of the book, Nietzsche is not the most easiest of the philosophers to read. Not because his writings are prolix. Because the things he says are sometimes so deep, you just have to pause for a moment and reflect.

As a new the store customer I was rather apprehensive of purchasing online in general. Many older users are apprehensive. However, the process was easy and quick. The overall appearance of Nietzsche's Beyond Good and Evil brand new, which I appreciate. Look forward to reading. I hope this helps any new online shoppers.

Truly there is no school like the old school. Dense and superficially articulate, Nietzsche's subtext bubbles with barely-suppressed rage at theocratic institutions which still exert control over society. If you want to read a book which absolutely blasts the "Church" element of the ancient institutions of Church and State which form the two main pillars over the marketplace of society's boulevard, start here.

This book is absolutely incredible. The literature, the language and the philosophy is sophisticated and spectacular. His arguments are extremely sophisticated and indisputable. He was a brilliant man and this book is a proof.

Sadly I listen to the libervox version of this at least once a month. Nietzsche is a philosopher I keep going back to years after the classes, his ideas are original and relevant even in the modern age. What if truth were a woman indeed.

I bought this book for a killer college course called "First Year Experience: Arts & Ideas."

This book is very Nietzsche. Basically all that I actually learned from it was Nietzsche's concepts about Apollonian and Dionysian forces in art and nature and that Nietzsche was a german philosopher who was very tough on himself...

The book itself was in very good, new condition when I received it and is basically still in very good, new condition because I used it THAT MUCH.