Talk:Friedrich Nietzsche: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Andreas R. Klose mNo edit summary |
imported>Brian P. Long (→A few thoughts: new section) |
||
| Line 27: | Line 27: | ||
| A editor3 = | | A editor3 = | ||
}}<noinclude>{{subpages}}</noinclude> | }}<noinclude>{{subpages}}</noinclude> | ||
== A few thoughts == | |||
I had a few thoughts on how we could brush this article up a little bit. Mind, I am by no stretch of the imagination a Nietzsche scholar or even a philosopher. Here's what I got: | |||
*A section on the Birth of Tragedy. The Birth of Tragedy is famous in its own right (well, sort of), but it's important personally and philosophically. | |||
*A fuller section on Elisabeth F-N and the broader political misappropriation of Nietzsche. | |||
*A discussion on the systematic/unsystematic debate. As it is now, the article briefly states that Nietzsche's thought is unsystematic; but I thought there were a few influential scholars who have argued that Nietzsche's thought is more systematic than commonly assumed: John Richardson's '''Nietzsche's System''', for one, and I thought Reginster's '''Affirmation of Life''' broadly took the view that Nietzche's thought can be made systematic. | |||
*Nietzche's style/literary influences on Nietzsche. It would be interesting and worthwhile, I think, to have some coverage of Nietzsche's position as one of the masters of 19th-century German prose, and it would also be interesting to have some coverage of Nietzsche's relationship to his literary forebears (Goethe, obviously, but also [[Georg Christoph Lichtenberg]]). | |||
*Nietzche and Classics. I don't know how much coverage this should have, and it doesn't seem substantial enough to merit a full article, but it's interesting what a negative response the Birth of Tragedy received among contemporary Classicists, and the reevaluation the book has had in the 20th century (I'm thinking primarily of Hugh Lloyd-Jones). | |||
Maybe this is more of a wish-list than anything else; but maybe there are things here we could get working on. [[User:Brian P. Long|Brian P. Long]] 03:45, 7 March 2009 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 21:45, 6 March 2009
A few thoughts
I had a few thoughts on how we could brush this article up a little bit. Mind, I am by no stretch of the imagination a Nietzsche scholar or even a philosopher. Here's what I got:
- A section on the Birth of Tragedy. The Birth of Tragedy is famous in its own right (well, sort of), but it's important personally and philosophically.
- A fuller section on Elisabeth F-N and the broader political misappropriation of Nietzsche.
- A discussion on the systematic/unsystematic debate. As it is now, the article briefly states that Nietzsche's thought is unsystematic; but I thought there were a few influential scholars who have argued that Nietzsche's thought is more systematic than commonly assumed: John Richardson's Nietzsche's System, for one, and I thought Reginster's Affirmation of Life broadly took the view that Nietzche's thought can be made systematic.
- Nietzche's style/literary influences on Nietzsche. It would be interesting and worthwhile, I think, to have some coverage of Nietzsche's position as one of the masters of 19th-century German prose, and it would also be interesting to have some coverage of Nietzsche's relationship to his literary forebears (Goethe, obviously, but also Georg Christoph Lichtenberg).
- Nietzche and Classics. I don't know how much coverage this should have, and it doesn't seem substantial enough to merit a full article, but it's interesting what a negative response the Birth of Tragedy received among contemporary Classicists, and the reevaluation the book has had in the 20th century (I'm thinking primarily of Hugh Lloyd-Jones).
Maybe this is more of a wish-list than anything else; but maybe there are things here we could get working on. Brian P. Long 03:45, 7 March 2009 (UTC)