- Shopping Bag ( 0 items )
Posted November 18, 2000
Go with the Dover thift edition
Thomas Common's origional translation is far superior to the later ones, both in the beauty of the wording and closeness to the German text. Unfortuately, this version officiously and unforgivably does-away with Common's 'archaic'English (e.g.'thou' and 'methinks', etc) and some of his more uncommon words (e.g.'abut'and 'gay'), thereby very much spoiling it. If people can't realise that 'gay' in this context doen't actually refer to homesexual, then they really shouldn't be reading such a book since they certainly won't understand Nietzsche's thoughts. When is one supposed to use words such as 'sepulchre' and 'abut' if not in a deep, poetic book like this? Instead of Ludovici's excellent notes this version substitutes a deeply patronising and whats more egregiously ignorant essay by the same man (I understand one is not allowed to use expletives) who spoilt Commons text. I sincerely advise that you buy the (5 star!)Dover thrift edition instead which thankfully (I believe) retains both Common's origional text and Ludovici's essay - plus its only a fraction of the price!
2 out of 2 people found this review helpful.Was this review helpful? Yes NoThank you for your feedback. Report this reviewThank you, this review has been flagged.
Posted May 7, 2006
An important train of thought to understand.
I'm now orthodox Catholic(former agnostic/atheist), however i have many atheist friends, and they all rave about Nietzsche. I must say Nietzsche is provocative, and a very talented as a writter, however i wasen't very impressed with his philosophy initself, i thought it was an interesting story, however Nietzsche seemed to fail to actually prove his contentions(to a sufficiant degree). I thought it was interesting that he chose for his character to claim 'God is dead' AFTER talking with the hermit, rather than choosing to creat a socratic style diologue(although i know he beleived Plato to be boring). His overman(or superman) theory is interesting, however i think Dostoevskies 'Crime and Punishment' refutes the pragmatic nature of the idea, and the validity of the idea itself. Not to ramble:). Intresting, provocative book, but i felt it failed to live up to its reputation, Id'd give it three stars, two because of Nietzschies' (amazing)talent as a writter, 1 for being provocative, but he looses two because i fell his philosophy is erronious
1 out of 1 people found this review helpful.Was this review helpful? Yes NoThank you for your feedback. Report this reviewThank you, this review has been flagged.
Posted July 5, 2013