Thus Spake Zarathustra: A Book for All and None

Nietzsche, Thus Spake Zarathustra

(5 stars)

Paul Santo

This was the last book i needed to read to complete the Nietzsche collection and it didn't disappoint. i guess it's time to move on to a new Philosopher.

What does it all mean??!

(5 stars)

SJM

Thank thanks to all the volunteers who read this. This work is a treasure trove of wisdom and thanks to Librivox, long trips in the car have become a lot more engaging. Nietzsche is like a Western Confucius. Compare the ideas and symbols in this novel with those of Twilight of the Idols, Beyond Good and Evil, and the Will to Power and common threads starr becoming apparent.

Mixed

(4.5 stars)

Iconoclast

Mixed quality of readers, some with background street noise, or poorly read, but generally acceptable. The importance of the work for Nietzsche studies and the quality of the work though make it indispensable.

A noble effort, but a few of the readers were hard to follow.

(2.5 stars)

Paulexander

Great

(5 stars)

A LibriVox Listener

Although some of the recordings had some annoyances overall good reading.

(4 stars)

braintoucher

Fantastic book! Readers were awful for the most part.

Try this alt free audio version

(2 stars)

davious

https://archive.org/details/Thus_Spake_Zarathustra_Audiobook

(2.5 stars)

Studio Eyeball Animation

Some readings were good, though inconsistent in tone, volume and speed. Naturally, many are going to disagree with Nietzsche on two of his main premises without much reflection on the arguments. The “God is dead” proposition normally is phrased without its qualifications, namely, because He died of shame of his human creations’ shortcomings, or because all the gods laughed each other out of existence. There are very few arguments for atheism in the book, contrary to one’s expectations. Of course, the whole proposition is poetic parody, specifically made to stir up a great theological controversy, without which few would have ever heard the name Nietzsche. (Marketing. Let’s be real.) The real main proposition is that man must be surpassed, and that to do this, we must become harder, stronger and more evil. He disputes that our average definition of evil is undesirable and often asserts that much bad is done by the ‘good’ who suppress the individual interests, which halts progress. Perhaps this is true to an extent, but Nietzsche gives no account of how progress would be made in a world where individual interests are to be halted at every step by moral and civil chaos. A Higher Man would be nothing more than the strongest caveman, because organized society and would be impossible. The ‘good’ are the ones who aid the ‘great’ by making society, (and therefore their armies) work. Alone, even a very strong man is a middling animal, and even a tiger cannot always be unassailable. Ultimately, Nietzsche’s ideal human is unattainable, for an equal and opposite reason as Marx’s is unattainable. Nietzsche misunderstood and oversimplified human nature, putting too much faith in unquestioned aggression, where Marx put too much faith in unquestioned cooperation. Humanity falls between these two extremes, each person falling somewhere in that spectrum. Humanity will certainly evolve if it doesn’t destroy itself first, but whether you call them virtues or sins, both aggression and cooperation will remain. But all that nuance is not to found here. I feel Nietzsche is at his best when writing poetry to nature, less idealized than in Romantic poets of his time. There are several interesting moments, such as between the Last Pope and Zarathustra, and some genuinely good satire, such as the Ass-Festival. Much of the rest feels disconnected and occasionally even contrary to the central themes. It is essential reading for anyone studying Western philosophy, but to me, little more than a chore. (I was dared by a friend.) Sorry, that was a longer review than was intended.