من دینامیتم، سرگذشت فریدریش نیچه

by Sue Prideaux, امین مدی - Amin Medi (Translator)

سو پریدو در کتابِ من دینامیتم تصویری خارق‌العاده از زندگی نیچه نقش می‌کند و نقاط تاریک مرگ و زندگی‌اش را به‌روشنی شرح می‌دهد. آنچه در من دینامیتم ارائه شده است روایت مفصل و گیرایی از زندگی فریدریش نیچه، در شخصی‌ترین حالتِ خویش است که او و سیر تحولِ فلسفه‌اش را در بستر شرایط زندگی‌‌‌اش قرار می‌دهد.

نیچه، چه در کلاس درس و چه در زندگیِ شخصیِ خویش، انسانی بسیار آرام، متواضع، خموش و مردم‌گریز بوده است و انسان‌‌های دوروبرش به‌ راحتی نادیده‌اش می‌گرفته ‌اند، اما دوستانی داشته که همواره در دشواری‌ها به یاری‌اش می‌شتافته ‌اند. کتاب نشان می‌دهد که دوستان‌ و اطرافیانش، از واگنر و بورکهارت گرفته تا خواهرش الیزابت، چه تأثیری بر زندگی و فلسفه‌ی او گذاشتند و چه بر سر آثار و فلسفه اش آمده است.

Genres: Philosophy, Biography, Nonfiction, History, Audiobook, Biography Memoir, Germany

520 pages, Hardcover

First published October 4, 2018

About the author

Sue Prideaux is an Anglo-Norwegian novelist and biographer. She has strong links to Norway and her godmother was painted by Edvard Munch, whose biography she later wrote under the title Edvard Munch: Behind the Scream. Prior to taking up writing she trained as an art historian in Florence, Paris, and London.

(from Wikipedia)

Reviews

[Valeriu Gherghel]

„Eu nu sînt cîtuşi de puţin un şarlatan, un monstru moral” (Ecce homo).

O biografie cumpănită (Nietzsche nu e prezentat nici ca sfînt și nici ca martir), scrisă cu acuratețe.

Un lucru e sigur, Friedrich Nietzsche (1844 - 1900) n-a avut noroc. Nici în viață, nici postum. În secolul al XIX-lea, boala de care a suferit nu avea un diagnostic precis. Cît despre remediu nici n-are rost să vorbim. Medicii i-au prescris medicamente, dar majoritatea erau perfect toxice: unguente pe bază de mercur, morfină, ether, picături de bromură etc. Nietzsche a încercat să-și aline suferința cu aceste otrăvuri.

În toamna lui 1870, de exemplu, în timpul războiului franco-prusac cînd a lucrat ca infirmier și a căzut bolnav, Nietzsche „a fost tratat cu azotat de argint, opiu și clisme cu acid tanic, tratamentul normal la vremea aceea, al cărui efect era că distrugea intestinele pacientului pe viață” (p.79).

Diferiți psihiatri contemporani au încercat să producă un diagnostic retrospectiv, ceea ce e imposibil. Sue Prideaux arată - și cu bun temei - că diagnosticul inițial (paralizie progresivă, indusă de o infecție luetică) a fost dictat, în primul rînd, de moda timpului și mai puțin de simptomele și manifestările pacientului. Medicii l-au tratat, așadar, pe Nietzsche cu maximă neglijență profesională. Într-un sens, era inevitabil. Evoluția de după 1889 a bolnavului infirmă, totuși, paralizia progresivă. Mai mult e greu de spus. Să nu uităm însă că tatăl lui Nietzsche, Carl a murit subit, pe 30 iulie 1849, cînd fiul lui încă nu împlinise 5 ani. În opinia doctorilor, cauza morții pastorului Nietzsche a fost, probabil, o „înmuiere a creierului” (pp.23-25, 335).

Neglijență sau neputință profesională? Să vedem. Profesorul Otto Binswanger, directorul Clinicii din Jena (care avea, poate, expertiza necesară pentru a invalida diagnosticul inițial), nu i-a dat prea multă atenție. S-a bizuit pe medicii care l-au examinat prima dată. Deși Nietzsche a stat în ospiciul din Jena 14 luni, Binswanger n-a pus la îndoială verdictul lor, probabil greșit (sifilis terțiar). Mai mult,

„În timpul cursurilor lui Binswanger, Nietzsche era folosit, alternativ cu alți pacienți, ca material didactic pentru studenți. El nu percepea acest lucru ca umilitor” (p.288).

Este exact ceea ce a făcut și sora lui Nietzsche, Elisabeth Alexandra Förster-Nietzsche, viitoarea admiratoare a lui Hitler, după ce bolnavul a fost adus acasă și a locuit în edificiul din Weimar, construit anume de ea pentru a glorifica geniul lui Nietzsche, dar mai ales propria-i persoană. Își va trata fratele ca pe un exponat prețios: „Lui Elisabeth îi plăcea să-l afișeze după cină. Adesea aranja ca el să fie întrezărit printr-o perdea fumurie, ca un strigoi la o ședință de spiritism” (p.308).

Friedrich Nietzsche nu mai era coerent din dimineața zilei de 3 ianuarie 1889, după criza de la Torino. Elisabeth mistifică realitatea și pretinde că, în timpul lungii sale agonii, filosoful discuta adesea cu ea și se consolau reciproc: „Cît de des mă lăuda pentru ce făceam! Cît de des mă liniștea cînd păream tristă! Recunoștința lui era înduioșătoare: De ce plîngi, Lisbeth?, mă întreba. Doar sîntem fericiți” (p.309).

Cînd citești aceste elucubrații, te cuprinde scîrba...

[Warwick]

Nietzsche is now preceded by his reputation to such a monstrous extent that it takes a bit of an effort to overcome all the received wisdom – which in my case was the only wisdom I had, having read only one of his books and virtually nothing else about him. Oh yeah, Nietzsche, wasn't he a bit right-wing? Tooled around with a terrific stare, declaiming things about the death of god? Women hated him, Nazis loved him? Something like that…?

He comes across in this fascinating biography as a smart, unusual, and not unkindly figure, but one overmastered by the emotional demands of his family, by an imposed solitariness, and by the lifelong ill health which, he knew, appeared to be leading inexorably to madness.

He tried to accustom himself to this possibility early; insanity ran in his family and his father had died young from a ‘softening of the brain’. From the beginning, in his writings, he was ‘exploring the idea of emancipatory insanity and the validity of the irrational’, in passages like this from Daybreak:

Ah, give me madness, you heavenly powers! Madness, that I may only at last believe in myself! Give deliriums and convulsions, sudden lights and darkness, terrify me with frost and fire such as no mortal has ever felt, with deafening din and prowling figures, make me howl and whine and crawl like a beast: so that I may come to believe in myself!

Well, he got what he wanted. He had a vital personal investment in many of his philosophical ideas, which had to do with turning ‘every “it was” into “I wanted it thus”’ – in other words, with not just accepting the things that happen to you, but forcing yourself to find joy and satisfaction in them. For him, this amor fati could be a big ask.

Most of the key locations in his life, as he developed these ideas, were in Switzerland. He took a professorship in Basel at just 24; spent probably the happiest years of his life at Wagner's house on Lake Lucerne, where he wrote The Birth of Tragedy; and later had his most dramatic epiphanies at Sils up in the Engadine (where tourists can still visit the ‘Zarathustra rock’). ‘Here my muses live,’ he said; ‘this region is blood and kin to me and even more than that.’

But misfortune did seem to follow him around, and there were very few friends who lasted long. Wagner had originally seen him as a worthy disciple, and the two had a close relationship, but it came apart in a miserable way. Wagner wrote to his doctor, asking whether some of Nietzsche's medical symptoms might not be ‘the effects of masturbation’; this letter somehow got into circulation, and Nietzsche found himself at a party in Bayreuth with everybody reading it surreptitiously and sniggering at him behind his back.

With women he had no luck at all. His most affectionate relationship was with Lou Salomé, the Russian-born thinker, writer and itinerant femme fatale. The two shared many long walks and deep conversations which meant a great deal to Nietzsche, but she was always interested in other smart people as well. For a while the two of them resolved to live à trois with the philosopher Paul Rée, but this modern arrangement also ended pathetically: one day, while they were travelling together, Nietzsche woke up to find the other two gone. He carried on to some other destinations on their itinerary, but could not find them; in fact, Salomé and Rée had just stayed where they were and lain low until Nietzsche disappeared.

One gets the impression of a seriously lonely man. There's a moment where the Goncourts' journal is published, and Nietzsche reads it and thinks wistfully how nice it must be to have these boozy, friendly dinners with guests like Zola and Turgenev. He would have flourished in that situation. But there he was, wandering around alone on an Alp, having ecstatic visions interspersed with bouts of crying.

It is partly for these reasons that his later writings can be, as Sue Prideaux puts it, ‘vengefully misogynistic’. Nevertheless, she says:

All his life he valued intelligent women, making close and enduring friendships with them. He only fell in love with clever women – starting with Cosima [Wagner]. He disliked ignorant and bigoted women.

Which brings us to his sister, Elisabeth. Nietzsche kept up a friendly correspondence with her, but he did not share her values: she was an ardent nationalist and a vicious antisemite, whereas Nietzsche considered himself a ‘bad German’ but a ‘very good European’. (He gave up his German citizenship to work in Basel, and remained officially stateless for the rest of his life.)

The rift between them became serious when Elisabeth married the nationalist activist Bernhard Förster. ‘I do not have his enthusiasm for “things German”,’ Nietzsche wrote to her, ‘and even less for keeping this “glorious” race pure. On the contrary, on the contrary—’ (Nietzsche liked to tell people he was Polish, after someone said his face looked like something from a Matejko painting.)

The Försters went off to start a bizarre antisemitic colony in Paraguay, but after her husband, deep in debt, finally killed himself, Elisabeth found a new project in managing the affairs of her brother. Nietzsche by this stage had gone completely la-la. He was signing his letters ‘The Crucified’, and telling correspondents things like, ‘I have ordered a convocation of princes in Rome – I mean to have the young emperor shot.’

If there was a certain élan to his early ideas about the liberating power of madness, there was none whatsoever to the reality: first confined to an asylum, and then long years shuffling around a room above his sister's parlour, scarcely able to remember his name or to speak coherently. Elisabeth took ownership of all his writings, copyrights and letters, and carefully controlled what would be released to researchers or the public.

But even the sadness of Nietzsche's final years is overshadowed by what was done to his reputation after he died. Elisabeth, in Prideaux's telling, was determined to turn her brother's writings to her own ideological ends – which by now had a political correlative. Giving a speech at a festival held to commemorate fifty years since Wagner's death, she announced: ‘We are drunk with enthusiasm because at the head of our government stands such a wonderful, indeed phenomenal, personality like our magnificent Chancellor Adolf Hitler. Ein Volk, Ein Reich, Ein Führer.’

The Nietzsche-Archiv, which she built and managed in Weimar, was soon stuffed with fellow believers. ‘Inside the Archive, everyone, from the doorkeeper to the head, is a Nazi,’ said one depressed disciple of Nietzsche's, who later fled into exile. ‘It is enough to make one weep…. Mysterious, incomprehensible Germany.’

Despite the superficial appeal of Nietzsche's terminology – the ‘blond beasts’, the ‘master race’ – it was not easy to jam his ideas into a fascist mould. As one leading Nazi ideologue commented: ‘If not for the fact that Nietzsche was not a nationalist or a socialist, and did not believe in race discrimination, he would have made a good Nazi.’

I am not up on Nietzsche scholarship so I don't know how controversial or un- this story is, but certainly here Nietzsche emerges as a figure deeply sympathetic, deeply troubled, and deeply misunderstood by posterity. It's a very sad tale, so one is grateful to Prideaux's dry, often openly comic style, which guides you through his life without any unnecessary drama, letting the facts speak for themselves.

‘Deutschland, Deutschland über Alles,’ he wrote scornfully, ‘I'm afraid that was the end of German philosophy.’ Unfortunately, it was just the start for ‘Nietzschean’ philosophy, and for a lot of people it's never recovered. It all makes for a completely riveting and desperately sad read.

[Jan-Maat]

Great fun. A very lively book, with some dramatic passages. Perhaps it is slightly awkward that Nietzsche was much less colourful than the people he interacted with, so the shining stars of this biography are the Wagners both of Cosima Wagner's husbands married her apparently because she looked very much like her father, the composer Liszt , Lou Salome, Strindberg, and even Nietzsche's sister who on account of being the unpleasant kind of person that you would not want to be acquainted with in real life - is very interesting to read about.

I am not sure if this is a great book for getting close to Nietzsche's thinking and ideas, but according to Prideaux, he said that all philosophy is autobiography, and the book pursues that as it's approach. Perhaps Nietzsche was not very forth coming in his correspondence, or interesting enough in person to merit insightful details recorded in other people's diaries, but I was surprised by the weight that Prideaux gave to Lou Salome's recollections twelve years later (if I remember correctly) of conversations with Nietzsche about his philosophy, particularly since Salome had strong opinions of her own - so is she really recalling Nietzsche's views or what resonated and was similar to her own thinking?

Nietzsche himself was changing or developing his ideas, in some cases he may have been playful or provocative, and ultimately he did go spectacularly mad in Turin in 1888/9, so one can also assume that that some of his ideas are symptoms of his mental breakdown as Prideaux implies for example his condemnation of coffee drinking at about the same time as he was writing in his letters in praise of Turin coffee coffee is available in other cities and may or may not be of similar importance to both philosophers and non-philosophers .

For Salome, Nietzsche was in search of a divine replacement for the Christian God, probably a revived Dionysus, the reason for this was that Nietzsche was too interested in having more sex and was therefore overly interested in Dionysian orgiastic rites. Salome was to become, eventually a promoter of Nietzsche's work, although in the early 1880s when they were friends and Nietzsche was planning that he and her and a mutual friend would live together, Salome and the friend hid from Nietzsche before catching a train to Berlin. Salome at that stage of her life was disinclined to sex on account of recently having been sexually assaulted by her tutor (she was only 21 when she met Nietzsche), later she married - her husband proposed by stabbing himself and threatening suicide - but she reserved sex only for an extra marital affair her and Nietzsche's mutual friend Paul Ree was not involved in this as he was gay, all of which illustrated for me that Nietzsche was not the most interesting person this Nietzsche biography Salome went on to be a muse to Rilke before joining Sigmund Freud and becoming an early psychoanalyst.

I wondered if Nietzsche's significance was in thinking new provocative thoughts, or in articulating what his contemporaries felt but were not able to put into words. His belief in the death of God and search for some alternative and occasional longing for new culturally unifying myths (originally Wagnerian opera seemed to fulfil this role for him, but later in life he preferred Bizet's Carmen) seems to belong more to the latter than the former, perhaps because his generation shared similar experiences of losing faith, though in line with all philosophy being autobiography, it feels significant that Nietzsche's father died when his son was four years old, later in life both Richard Wagner coincidentally a distant cousin as I recall from a complex family tree at the Nietzsche museum in Naumburg and Jakob Burckhardt seem to have been father figures for Nietzsche (who Oedipally turned against Wagner).

I found the take up and spread of Nietzsche's ideas the most interesting aspect apart from the multi-coloured people who were not Nietzsche but this came about late in his life and isn't a focus of Prideaux's book, Strindberg was an early fan (via the Danish critic Georg Brandes he was like several of Nietzsche's early supporters Jewish who interested Edward Munch in Nietzsche, Nietzsche asked Strindberg to translate his books into French, however the tenor of their correspondence led Strindberg to think that Nietzsche was already mad.

Nietzsche himself is a curiously quiet presence in his own biography, extremely short-sighted with sensitive eyes, he was happy walking in mountain landscapes - he grew a bushy moustache to intimidate people and prevent them from talking to him which seems mostly to have been effective, he had a stellar academic career (he was offered a post as a Professor before he had graduated from university) which he grew rapidly sick of, he struggled with an early typewriter and eventually found music to have too overwhelmingly powerful an effect on him - as though he feared it would turn him into a Manchurian candidate.

Brandes described Nietzsche as an Aristocratic Radical, a description which delighted him and encompasses his dislike of the politics of the German Second Empire, opposition to anti-Semitism, opposition to the Christian Church, and fairly elitist views.
Still, a brilliant and colourful read.

He seems in places the father of the contemporary and even the banal - he was a fan of practising gratitude for a while, his stumbling blocks in this were his mother and his sister who he struggled at times to be positive about. Much of his thinking seemed to me a response to Straus' Life of Jesus - which also had a huge affect on George Elliot, this was peculiarly significant as he was the son of a Priest and his mother hoped (prompted? urged? expected? ) that Nietzsche too would become a Priest, the death of God and the rejection of Christianity then was a statement about a personal longing for liberation as much as a philosophical or sociological statement, and as one might expect from a son of the manse and a person saturated in nineteenth century education he rather over states the impact on Christian values on European societies but then in my view in terms of attitudes, law or social structure European societies are mostly pre-Christian in terms of Gospel teachings, there's not much evidence of turning the other cheek, or of the sinless throwing the first stone, though arguably after 1945 there has been some modest sharing of loaves and fishes. Nietzsche strikes me as an interesting contrasts to Simone Weil. Both had a similarly intense response to ancient Greek culture, but took opposite views to Christianity, Weil embraces faith ever more powerfully while at the same time being socially more radical than Nietzsche while he positioned himself in search of some other faith which he did not seem to find.

[Erik Graff]

When asked for recommendations by those unversed in philosophy I most commonly recommend Plato and Nietzsche. Both are enduringly popular. Both are immediately accessible. Though often misinterpreted, both also describe the antipodes of Western philosophy: the metaphysical and the anti-metaphysical, the classical religious and the modern secular ideals.

As the Church has misappropriated Plato for its purposes, so much of the abuse of Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900) stemmed from the decades of control of his estate by his racist sister Elisabeth (1846-1935) and her increasingly Nazi entourage. This has been substantially rectified for American readers by the republication of his works, unsullied by her self-serving ministrations, by such translators and biographers as W. Kaufmann and R.J. Hollingdale. Now, with S. Prideaux's current biography, such reconstructions of this man have attained a greater completeness.

While Kaufmann, the one most responsible for the reintroduction of Nietzsche to the English-reading public, produced a magisterial biography of the philosopher in 1950 (rev. 1968), his emphasis was more on the evolution of Nietzsche's writing and ideas. Prideaux's particular virtue is in having provided a very readable and more fully-fleshed portrait of the man and those closest to him. She is particularly strong in providing a lucid exposition of his intellectual development in relation to his physical condition and erotic life without thereby belittling either the man or his work.

Where Prideaux is weak is in placing Nietzsche within his philosophical context, neglecting, I think his dependence, via Schopenhauer and others, on Kant. But this is the objection of a philosophically-inclined reader and hers is first and foremost a biography, a very good one, which should appeal to specialists and generalists alike.

[Olethros]

-Mucho de su vida y, aunque pueda parecer contradictorio, quizá no tanto de él.-

Género. Biografía.

Lo que nos cuenta. El libro ¡Soy dinamita! (publicación original: I am Dynamite!, 2018) es un acercamiento a la vida del filósofo Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche, a su obra y las personas que influyeron en ambas.

¿Quiere saber más de este libro, sin spoilers? Visite:

http://librosdeolethros.blogspot.com/...

[Michael Perkins]

Fabulous essay by Christopher Hitchens about Nietzsche...

https://archive.vanityfair.com/articl...

===============

The author explains the origins of Zarathustra....

Why did Nietzsche choose Zarathustra? Zarathustra, also called Zoroaster, was a Persian prophet who probably lived some time between the twelfth and sixth centuries before Christ. Zarathustra presented a key to the problem of evil that could never be answered by Judaism, Christianity or Islam, whose all-powerful gods were all-good. In Zoroastrianism the god of light is in constant conflict with the god of darkness and evil. At the end of time, the god of light will score a final victory, but until then he is not in control of events. Consequently, Zoroastrianism, unlike the three great religions of the book, escapes the paradox of an all-powerful good God who is responsible for what many people take to be unnecessary evil.

Zarathustra’s ten years of solitude in the mountains between the ages of thirty and forty might stand for Nietzsche’s post-Basel decade of independent thinking, which was often conducted on high mountains. Zarathustra is forty, the same age as the writer Nietzsche is, when he comes down “to be among the people.” He carries down fire, as Prometheus had carried the fire that would transform cultures and civilizations and as the Holy Ghost had carried down tongues of fire at Pentecost. Fire bestows upon the chosen ones (the enlightened ones) the gift of “speaking in tongues,” i.e. in words that are universally comprehensible. It is a synonym for wisdom and for revelation. Zarathustra’s fire has the specific ability to scorch meaning into the meaninglessness of life following upon the death of God. His mouth alone (through Nietzsche’s) will be the first to address the nihilism, despair and devaluation of moral life that was reaching its crisis within the context of nineteenth-century materialism.

At the end of his book he writes:  "Dead are all gods: now we want the Übermensch to live---Thus spoke Zarathustra.”

He sent it to his publisher describing it in his cover letter as “a fifth gospel.”

=========

In 1888, Kaiser Wilhelm I had died at last, at the age of ninety. Seventeen years previously, he had accepted the German crown in the Hall of Mirrors in Versailles, to Nietzsche’s great distress and fear for the imbalance of Europe. In the intervening years, the Kaiser and his Iron Chancellor Bismarck had famously forged the archconservative and repressive Second Reich on industrialization, capitalism, unscrupulous expansionism, the Protestant Church, artistic conservatism and censorship.

"All this had coagulated into one massive, congested, sclerotic, nationalist, repressive and authoritarian world power— as Nietzsche had feared would happen."

As a university student in the late 1880s and early ’90s, Harry Kessler [executor Nietzsche’s literary estate] was part of “the Raskolnikov generation”: those on whom Dostoyevsky’s novel Crime and Punishment had a profound effect. Kessler served as witness at the trial of a highborn fellow student who shot and killed his working-class girlfriend, after which the murderer failed to kill himself because his shot into his own chest was not well aimed. It was a nihilist act inspired by Dostoyevsky’s book, which made an unquantifiable impression on the first post-Christian despairing generation. A rash of such murders among students overcome by “the great disgust,” the will to nothingness, became known as “the Raskolnikov effect” after the anti-hero in Dostoyevsky’s book.

Three years after leaving university, Kessler felt able to write, “There is probably no twenty-to-thirty-year-old tolerably educated man in Germany today who does not owe to Nietzsche a part of his worldview, or has not been more or less influenced by him..."

1893 became an important year during which Nietzsche’s work caught on with the artistic avant-garde of both Berlin and Paris to wide effect through painting, playwriting, poetry and music. Scandinavians also set the Nietzschean fire.

This would have been astonishing enough to Nietzsche, who had so often expressed his horror at the idea of having disciples, but the political tenor of the Nietzsche cult would have horrified him further still.

"The approach of the First World War gave impetus to a bellicose form of Nietzscheism that took the will to power as a moral teaching sanctioning violence and ruthlessness, the Übermensch as the greatest brute, and the blond beast as an incentive toward a racial breeding program."

Newspaper articles by Nietzsche's anti-Semitic, fascist sister, Elizabeth, encouraged these twisted interpretations, enthusiastically describing her brother as a friend of war.

His sister, along with her anti-Semitic husband, gathered together out of context fragments from Nietzsche's notebooks, adding their own ideas as if they were his, into a volume titled "Triumph of the Will" with Nietzsche identified as the author on the cover and the title page. This book was eagerly adopted by Mussolini as a justification for his fascist nationalism and thirst for war. In Germany, the Weimar period was a gestation period of this work. Hitler and the Nazis became admirers of both the book and Elizabeth.

Philosopher Oswald Spengler made things worse by incorporating Social Darwinism into the alleged beliefs of Nietzsche. The misunderstood terms Übermensch and “master morality” served Spengler's purpose.

Soon after philosopher Martin Heidegger joined the Nazi Party, the notorious German professor, Alfred Bäumler, who had issued a new edition of "The Triumph of the Will," oversaw the first book burning in Berlin. A film, directed by Leni Riefenstah, of the 1934 Nuremberg Rally was titled "Triumph of the Will" as a nod to the influence of the book.

Of course, Hitler never actually read any Nietzsche, including the phony "Triumph of the Will," but simply saw it as useful propaganda. On her deathbed in 1935, Elizabeth had Hitler's "Mein Kampf" read to her aloud. Hitler attended her funeral.

[Rêbwar]

«از تقدیرم آگاهم، روزی نام من با یاد و خاطره چیزی هراس‌انگیز همراه خواهد شد. با بحرانی بی‌سابقه در زمین، با ژرف‌ترین درگیری وجدان، با تصمیمی برانگیخته شده علیه همه چیز‌هایی که تا آن زمان متعلق به باور و طلب و تقدیس بوده‌اند. من انسان نیستم؛ من دینامیتم.»

چنین جمله‌ای را نمی‌توان تنها یک اعلام موضع دانست. این فریادِ کسی است که تمام عمرش را در جدال با میراثی گذرانده که هم از آن می‌گریخت و هم نمی‌توانست بی‌آن زیست کند. فریدریش نیچه، مردی که از دلِ رنج‌های جسمانی و تنهاییِ جان‌فرسا، فلسفه‌ای برآورد که به تعبیر بسیاری از متفکران پس از او، شالوده‌ی جهان مدرن را لرزاند. و «من دینامیتم»، زندگی‌نامه‌ای است که با قلم دقیق و پرحرارت سو پریدو، این انسان هراس‌انگیز را از دل اسطوره بیرون کشیده و به انسانی گوشت و خون‌دار، پر از ضعف‌ها و شکنندگی‌ها بدل می‌کند.

این کتاب نه صرفاً روایت یک فیلسوف، بلکه داستان تولد و زوال یک روح است. پریدو نشان می‌دهد که هیچ اندیشه‌ای در خلأ شکل نمی‌گیرد. «خدا مرده است»، «ابرانسان»، «بازگشت جاودانه» ــ همه‌ی این مفاهیم پیش از آنکه به گزاره‌هایی فلسفی بدل شوند، پژواکی از تنهایی، بیماری، شکست‌های عاطفی و جستجوی بی‌وقفه‌ی نیچه برای معنا بودند. او همان‌قدر که با افلاطون و مسیحیت و اخلاق بردگی در جدال بود، با بدن خودش، با ضعف‌هایش، با خاطره‌ی کودکی‌ای که زیر سایه‌ی مرگ پدر و تسلط مادر و خویشاوندان زن شکل گرفته بود نیز در جنگ دائمی می‌زیست.

یکی از جذاب‌ترین دستاوردهای کتاب، نشان دادن رابطه‌ی ناگسستنی میان زندگی شخصی و اندیشه‌ی نیچه است. پریدو می‌نویسد که چطور شکست عشقی او با لو سالومه، فیلسوف و نویسنده‌ی روس، نه‌تنها زخمی شخصی بر جای گذاشت، بلکه در تکوین نگاه او به روابط انسانی و جایگاه زنان تأثیر گذاشت. یا اینکه بیماری‌های بی‌امان ــ سردردهای مهلک، ضعف بینایی، مشکلات گوارشی ــ چگونه او را به انزوا راند و همین انزوا، بستری شد برای خلق آثاری چون «چنین گفت زرتشت». این پیوند میان زیست و فلسفه، همان چیزی است که کتاب پریدو را از دیگر زندگی‌نامه‌ها متمایز می‌سازد: او نیچه را نه یک ذهن مجرد، بلکه انسانی زنده با تاریخچه‌ای عمیقاً تراژیک می‌بیند.

نقش واگنر و کوزیما نیز در این روایت برجسته است. رابطه‌ی آغازین نیچه با واگنر، آمیخته با ستایش و دوستی عمیق بود، اما به مرور به دشمنی و نفرت بدل شد. واگنر برای نیچه نماینده‌ی همان چیزی شد که او در نهایت علیه آن شورید: روح آلمانی گرفتار در ملی‌گرایی، مسیحیتِ دوباره احیا شده، و هنری که به جای رهایی، به بندگی می‌کشاند. این جدال نه فقط یک اختلاف شخصی، بلکه شکافی بود که مسیر فلسفی نیچه را دگرگون کرد.

اما شاید تراژیک‌ترین بخش کتاب، سرنوشت اندیشه‌های نیچه پس از فروپاشی روانی‌اش باشد. خواهرش، الیزابت، که در کتاب تصویری زنده و گاه هولناک از او ارائه می‌شود، تمام تلاش خود را کرد تا آثار نیچه را به سود ایدئولوژی‌های خود بازنویسی و مصادره کند. او همان کسی است که زمینه را برای نزدیکی نیچه به نازیسم فراهم آورد؛ نسبتی که امروز به مدد پژوهش‌های تاریخی روشن شده که کاملاً تحریف‌شده و ساختگی بوده است. پریدو با جزئیات نشان می‌دهد که چگونه از دل این دستکاری‌ها، فیلسوفی که اساساً مخالف هر نوع جزم‌گرایی بود، به ابزار تبلیغاتی فاشیسم بدل شد.

نثر کتاب، روایی و داستان‌پردازانه است؛ خواننده احساس می‌کند نه یک متن خشک فلسفی، بلکه رمانی پر از شخصیت‌ها و کشمکش‌ها می‌خواند. شخصیت‌هایی مانند بورکهارت، استاد تاریخ هنر، یا همان لو سالومه‌ی مرموز، یا دوستان دانشگاهی نیچه، همگی همچون بازیگران یک نمایش تراژیک، پیرامون او حرکت می‌کنند. و درست همین سبک است که باعث می‌شود حتی خواننده‌ای که آشنایی اندکی با فلسفه دارد، بتواند در لابه‌لای سطور کتاب، انسانِ نیچه را لمس کند.


نیچه را نمی‌توان تنها به‌عنوان فیلسوفی در کنار دیگر متفکران تاریخ اندیشه نشاند. او بیش از آن‌که یک فیلسوف باشد، یک زلزله است؛ تکانی درونی و ریشه‌ای در فرهنگ غربی. وقتی می‌گفت «من دینامیتم»، منظورش تنها نیروی تخریب نبود؛ او به‌خوبی می‌دانست که هر ویرانی‌ای مقدمه‌ی بنیانی تازه است. کار او تنها این نبود که نقدی بر مسیحیت، اخلاق بردگان یا متافیزیک یونانی وارد کند؛ او پرسشی بنیادی پیش روی بشر گذاشت: وقتی زمین زیر پایمان تهی می‌شود و خدایان سقوط می‌کنند، چه چیزی می‌ماند جز اراده‌ی ما برای ساختن؟

کتاب «من دینامیتم» در روایت زندگی و اندیشه‌های نیچه، نشان می‌دهد که چگونه این مرد شکننده‌ی بیمار، با جسمی نحیف و ذهنی تیزتر از هر تیغ، توانست جهان معنوی یک تمدن را به لرزه درآورد. در این اثر بارها لمس می‌کنیم که نیچه در مرز میان جنون و روشن‌بینی راه می‌رود؛ گویی تنها یک تار مو فاصله دارد تا از فیلسوفی ژرف‌اندیش به دیوانه‌ای کامل بدل شود. اما همین تعادل شکننده است که صدای او را یگانه می‌سازد: صدایی که نه تنها علیه اخلاق کهنه و ایمان کورکورانه می‌شورد، بلکه جسارت می‌کند از چیزی تازه سخن بگوید؛ از انسانِ برتر، از بازگشت جاودان، از شور زندگی به‌جای تسلیم در برابر مرگ.

نکته‌ی مهم در مواجهه با نیچه، آن است که او هرگز نخواست آموزه‌ای منسجم، یک «سیستم» فلسفی ارائه دهد. او سیستم‌ها را همان‌قدر منفور می‌دانست که بت‌های دینی را. آثارش تکه‌تکه، ضربه‌ای، گزاره‌وار است؛ هر جمله همچون چکشی بر سنگفرش سنت می‌کوبد. شاید به همین دلیل است که او بیش از آن‌که در محافل خشک آکادمیک زنده باشد، در ادبیات، هنر، موسیقی و حتی سیاست حضوری پررنگ‌تر دارد. نیچه برای شاعران و هنرمندان الهام‌بخش است، زیرا او خود یک شاعر بود، یک موسیقی‌دان ناکام، و مهم‌تر از همه، انسانی که رنج را به کلمات بدل کرد.

در دل این کتاب می‌توان ردپای آن رنج را دید: انزوای نیچه، بیماری‌های بی‌امان، شکست‌های عاشقانه‌اش، و طردشدگی از سوی همان جامعه‌ای که بعدها او را به‌عنوان نابغه‌ای بی‌بدیل ستایش کرد. شاید همین زخم‌ها بود که او را واداشت با تمام توان به جهان بتازد. وقتی می‌گفت «خدا مرده است»، این صرفاً یک گزاره‌ی الحادی نبود؛ این فریاد انسانی بود که در دل خلأ معنوی می‌زیست و می‌خواست بشریت را وادار کند مسئولیت زندگی‌اش را خود به دوش بگیرد.

شاید همین جاست که قدرت نیچه آشکار می‌شود: او نه تنها ایمان را فرو ریخت، بلکه جایگزینی هم پیشنهاد داد. «اراده به قدرت» و «انسان برتر» صرفاً مفاهیمی فلسفی نیستند؛ آن‌ها دعوتی هستند به جسارت، به آفرینش معنا از دل پوچی. در جهانی که دیگر خدایی بر فراز سر نیست، تنها خالق معنا خود انسان است. این همان جایی است که نیچه از منتقدی تندخو به پیامبری شورشی بدل می‌شود. پیامبری که البته هیچ بهشت آماده‌ای وعده نمی‌دهد، بلکه می‌گوید: بهشت را خودت باید بیافرینی.

در این کتاب می‌بینیم که چگونه زندگی نیچه از ابتدا تا فروپاشی نهایی‌اش، یک نبرد مداوم میان ضعف جسم و قدرت اندیشه بوده است. او بارها تا مرز جنون پیش رفت و سرانجام در همان مرز باقی ماند. اما شاید همین سرنوشت بود که کلماتش را چنین نافذ کرد. تاریخ پر است از فیلسوفانی منظم، متفکرانی منطقی، اما کمتر کسی توانسته همچون نیچه روح انسان مدرن را به آتش بکشد.

باید اعتراف کرد که خواندن نیچه همیشه آسان نیست. گزاره‌های او پر از تناقض، ابهام و گاه حتی خشونت است. اما درست همین تناقض‌هاست که او را زنده نگه می‌دارد. او فیلسوفی نیست که بتوانی یک بار بخوانی و تمامش کنی؛ او همچون زخمی است که مدام خون تازه بیرون می‌دهد. هر بار که به سراغش برمی‌گردی، معنای دیگری از دل کلماتش بیرون می‌کشی.

کتاب «من دینامیتم» این تجربه را با قدرتی خاص منتقل می‌کند. نویسنده در بازسازی زندگی و افکار نیچه، نه تنها به سراغ نوشته‌های او رفته، بلکه به بستر تاریخی و اجتماعی زمانه‌اش نیز پرداخته است: اروپایی که در حال پوست‌اندازی از عصر ایمان به عصر علم و صنعت بود، و در همان حال درگیر بحران‌های هویتی. نیچه فرزند این بحران بود؛ صدایی که می‌خواست به جهانی لرزان بفهماند: باید خودت خالق معنای خود باشی، وگرنه در میان پوچی غرق خواهی شد.

در نهایت، مواجهه با نیچه چیزی شبیه به ایستادن بر لبه‌ی پرتگاه است. هم وسوسه‌ی سقوط در تو بیدار می‌شود و هم شجاعت پرواز. کتابی مثل «من دینامیتم» کمک می‌کند تا این تجربه‌ی خطرناک را لمس کنی؛ تجربه‌ای که نه تنها به فهم بهتر یک فیلسوف، که به فهم بهتر خودت منجر می‌شود. زیرا پرسش‌های نیچه پرسش‌های همه‌ی ماست: در جهانی بی‌خدا، بی‌مرکز و بی‌پناه، چه کسی قرار است مسئول زندگی‌ات باشد جز خودت؟


نیچه در زندگی‌اش هرگز توفیق نیافت که فیلسوفی «موفق» به معنای متعارف کلمه باشد. آثارش در زمان حیاتش خوانندگان اندکی داشتند، او هیچ‌گاه در محیط دانشگاهی پذیرفته نشد، معاشرت‌هایش اغلب به جدایی و دلخوری ختم شد. و شاید همین شکست‌ها بود که او را به آن جملات تند و رادیکال رساند؛ جملاتی که می‌خواستند نه تأییدی بر جهان، بلکه انکار بنیادینش باشند. او دینامیت بود.

اما عظمت کتاب پریدو تنها در نمایش این فروپاشی‌ها و رنج‌ها نیست، بلکه در نشان دادن لحظاتِ درخشش است: آن روزهای انزوا در کوهستان‌های سوئیس که زرتشت در ذهن او شکل گرفت، آن سطور سرشار از شور که امید به ابرانسان را فریاد می‌زدند، آن لحظه‌های ناب که با همه‌ی بیماری و ضعف، هنوز توانست زبان را به انفجار بدل کند.

خواندن این کتاب تجربه‌ای‌ست هم فلسفی و هم انسانی. فلسفی، از آن‌رو که می‌فهمیم چرا اندیشه‌های نیچه چنین اهمیتی در قرن بیستم و پس از آن یافتند؛ و انسانی، از آن‌رو که درمی‌یابیم پشت آن جملات پرطنین، مردی تنها و رنجور ایستاده بود. مردی که تقدیرش این بود که «با یاد و خاطره چیزی هراس‌انگیز» همراه شود.

اگر بخواهیم از میان زندگی‌نامه‌های متعدد نیچه تنها یکی را برگزینیم، این اثر به‌حق بهترین انتخاب است. چرا که هم روایتگرِ زندگی است، هم شارحِ اندیشه‌ها، هم برملاکننده‌ی سوءتفاهم‌ها، و هم قصه‌گوی تراژدی انسانی‌ای که در نهایت، به جنون و سکوت ختم شد.

شاید مهم‌ترین میراثی که کتاب به ما یادآوری می‌کند، همان است که نیچه خود پیش‌تر گفته بود: هر فلسفه‌ی بزرگی، اعترافی شخصی است. پس اگر می‌خواهیم نیچه را بفهمیم، باید نه فقط کلماتش، که زخم‌ها و شکست‌هایش را نیز بخوانیم.

او انسان نبود. او دینامیت بود. و هنوز، پس از گذشت بیش از یک قرن، انفجارش ادامه دارد.

[Biblio Curious]

A book like this needs to be composed like music. All the elements must be gently pulled in so the main themes can shine through. Prideaux accomplishes this with such great finesse.

Essentially, this book has 3 main threads that she stays true to for the entire biography:
*Chronology of Nietzsche's Life, filled with colourful details.
*An Intellectual History of his Philosophical Development, flooded with bookish details.
*Historical Context as it Relates to Nietzsche, with the goal of setting the record straight.

We can see Nietzsche develop from his early 20's. True to any young man, this section of the book is the most lively and fastest to read. The early pages are packed with books he read, what he thought of them, his keen friendship with Wagner & his musical life.

Next, the biography moves into his middle years, where the intellectual development slows down but his private life certainly picks up. He's essentially come into his own for what he believes in. The rest reads like a, well, not a gossipy newspaper column. He's still a great thinker, Prideaux's writing still sings, perhaps he's simply a man who fell in love? And if this biography reads as beautifully as fiction, our villain is clearly moving onto the chessboard.

This final section is where I was rendered on the floor in emotional turmoil. Again, Prideaux's writing keeps the more complex periods of history clear & easy to read. Which only emphasizes the tragedy of thoughts gone wrong. These were an emotionally crippling couple of pages with exquisitely concise summaries of Nietzsche's final self published works. She includes spoilers on these few pages, if you consider lines like Descartes' "I Think Therefore, I Am" to be a spoiler.

The final pages include:
*Aphorisms as a great tribute.
*Near year by year Chronology from 1844-1935
*Endnotes citing the sources, little to no commentary
*A pretty fun sounding Bibliography for book nerds

I'd recommend this to fans of Nietzsche & his naysayers most of all. She reduces him back the mere man he wanted to be, removing the legend that his sister painstakingly tried to build up. As a result, perhaps Nietzsche can finally become ...

* impish smile, you have to read this book & his works to find out *

My 1st Impressions Video, filmed before I read this:
https://youtu.be/Qug7mp7Oq7I

My final review, it gives a very brief update to the 1st Impressions & less information than this written review:
https://youtu.be/Ygb1gl3vU-o

[Paltia]

A mostly captivating biography of a widely misunderstood man. I am left with the impression of a solitary, lonely and confused soul wandering about, moving from place to place, in search of belonging and fleeing his oppressive mother and sister. There are brief intervals of reciprocity with Wagner and Lou Salome but in the end he is a man very much alone. Next time I pick up a book he wrote I will approach it with a deepened understanding of the origins of his ideas.

[Morgan Blackledge]

Modernity’s Timeline:

Pre Modernity: Abrahamic religions envelop the western world in intellectual darkness. Billions die in crusades, genocides, inquisitions, witch hunts and wholy wars.

1859: Darwin accidentally kills god.

1867: Marx tries to figure it all out by deconstructing and rationalizing systems of material production and governance. Stalin gets ahold of it and around 20 million people end up dead.

1886: Nietzsche tries to figure it all out by deconstructing and rationalizing systems of morality. Hitler gets ahold of it and around 20 million people end up dead.

1899: Freud tries to figure it all out by deconstructing and rationalizing systems of psychology. Madison Avenue gets ahold of it and the rest of us end up dead (starting with the frogs and polar bears).

Yet, somehow, we’re still better off 😐

[Steven R. Kraaijeveld]

"'I am frightened,' Nietzsche had written, 'by the thought of what unqualified and unsuitable people may invoke my authority one day. Yet that is the torment of every great teacher of mankind: he knows that, given the circumstances and the accidents, he can become a disaster as well as a blessing to mankind.'" (374-5)

Ironically, Nietzsche wrote these words in a letter to his sister Elizabeth, who, as Prideaux painfully shows, abused her brother and his thought more than anyone else—associating it with Nazi ideology in a manner that echoes to this day. Hopefully, Prideaux's biography will dispel the last, lingering notions that Nietzsche was an anti-Semite and proto-Nazi (already intrepidly addressed by Walter Kaufmann before her).

The biography was compelling and surprisingly sad. Poor, misunderstood, ill-fated Nietzsche! Prideaux does a brilliant job of vividly portraying his life; throughout the story (and it does read like a story) you feel as if you're right there alongside Nietzsche, thinking along with him and sharing his troubles.

I wrote a longer piece about biographizing Nietzsche, which, if you're interested, you can find right here on my website.

[Meike]

English: I Am Dynamite!: A Life of Nietzsche
This book is no doubt super interesting and written in an immersive manner, but while I'm happy I received an ARC, it was in a format that can only be read via Adobe Digital Editions - meaning on the screen, and the book has 700+ pages. So I will buy the hardcover instead: By skimming the pages to get an impression, I saw that this text is certainly worthwhile.

[Mehrsa]

This is a really well-written and vivid memoir of Nietzsche and his legacy. He was a weird and really smart dude. The manner of his decline and death was tragic, but not as tragic as the misuse of his core ideas by the Nazis. Prideaux makes the compelling case that it was his sister that twisted his legacy and that Nietzsche himself would have been appalled

[Jay Green]

I think it was Flaubert who said "Live like a bourgeois so you can write like a bohemian," or words to that effect. Never was such advice followed so assiduously as it was by Nietzsche who, if Sue Prideaux's book is to believed, managed to spend his entire existence without encountering a single episode of adventure or excitement. Sure, there are adventures of the mind, of familial and emotional turmoil, of intellectual conflict and dialectic, but by and large his life seems to have been one of comfort, conformity, and contemplation, be it walking in the mountains or reclining in drawing rooms of the genteel. Of course, one can hardly blame Sue Prideaux if Nietzsche led such a mundane and tedious existence, but by bringing Nietzsche down to earth and showing how even his earth-shattering philosophy was so closely connected to his personal life, loves, and rivalries, she manages to underplay her own hand, subverting the "dynamite" metaphor of the title to reveal a Nietzsche all too human.

[Noor jamal]

“من لم يحب نيتشه وهو أنسان اعلى، سيحبه وهو عبوة ديناميت"

ترجمة هذه النوعية من كتب السيرة مهم لأنهُ يجعلنا على مقربة من حياة الفيلسوف نيتشه وتفاصيلها، حيث كانت ولفترة طويلة سيرته تُعاني من ألتباسات تخص حياته العاطفية والأجتماعية، كان لابد من تسليط الضوء على التحولات المهمة التي خلقت من هذا الأنسان رمز في الفلسفة وأهم مراجعها.

كمطلعة و قارئة للكتب التي تخص حياة نيتشه ارى ان هذا الكتاب كان الأكمل من ناحية السرد الذي جاء على يد الروائية "سو بريدو" المتخصصة بكتابة السير الذاتية، ومن ناحية الترجمة حيث ملأت فراغات وعيوب الترجمات السابقة التي تخص حياة نيتشه، من حيث اللغة التي جاءت بأسلوب ادبي واضح وسلس اقرب لِلغة القصص والروايات، والسهولة في اختيار المفردة.
المعروف عن لغة نيتشه انها لغة النخبة لإنها تمر بعدة مراحل من الترجمات، وليس بالهين الحصول على ترجمة تصل بسلاسة للجميع.
سقف اللغة في هذا الكتاب يشبه (تشذيب شجرة)
لإنها مرت بعدة مراحل ترجمة اولى وترجمة ثانية وثالثة حتى وصلت لنا بهذا الشكل، مما جعل جهد مترجمي الكتاب "احمد عزيز وسارة أزهر" اكبر وهذا شيء يحسب لهما لأن اللغة فيهِ تعلن البراءة من الفذلكة اللغوية الصعبة في بعض الترجمات.

يضيف الكتاب لحياة نيتشه الجانب الأنساني المحجوب عنا بعد ان كان التركيز على فلسفته وشذراته وكتبه، فيبين لك شخصية نيتشه الذواق للموسيقى والفن، العاشق ، الموالي للعائلة، المُحب للنساء، الصديق الرائع، المجتهد، الخجول، هذه الشخصية الطيبة النقية التي تتسم بالعُلا التي يطمح صاحبها ان يقول في عشر جُمل ما يقوله الآخرون في كتاب كامل كانت هي شخصية الأنسان الأعلى في كل جوانب الحياة.

هامش*
لا تنسى أن تأخذ السوط معك.

[C. Quabela]

Nietzsche was the primary philosopher who inspired me to pursue the field. Not that he offers a (coherent) belief system or ready-to-hand tools for life, but he does provide the type of critical perspective necessary to begin questioning one’s life. His thought has so much become a part of my own that whenever I revisit his works I find aphorisms that mirror my own dispositions in ways I never realized had sunk in. I feel, as do many who have been inspired by him, an emotional connection with his thought given which he holds a dear place for me. All that is to say that I was both anxious and apprehensive to read a biography on his person.

The task of writing about the life of Nietzsche is not without its perils. With a hankering after the irrational and revelry it is just as vital to capture the setting and atmosphere within which Nietzsche’s thought developed so as to impress the mood that makes up such a part of Nietzsche’s aesthetic. Prideaux does a superb job in recreating the environment that so affected and afflicted this tormented thinker. With Nietzsche’s own penchant for colorful descriptions, Prideaux works hard to maintain a similar flourish without becoming garish. Nor can one write a biography of Nietzsche without addressing the philosophical thought that consumed him. Prideaux adroitly weaves within the story of his life not only Nietzsche’s own thought, but that of the likes of Empedocles, Kant, Schopenhauer, and more in a manner that seems natural and easy to digest. However, I question Prideaux’s choice to give synopses of Nietzsche’s books, particularly those after his Untimely Meditations. Nietzsche’s works are far too broad and nuanced to neatly sum up in a couple of pages and I fear that these sections may mislead the reader into false starts and premature conclusions about his works.

What I find most commendable about this biography is that Prideaux does not mythologize unsubstantiated events in Nietzsche’s life, not even those considered pivotal, nor speculate about them other than where it is further noted by contemporaries making up the primary sources consulted. For example, the time in which it is supposed that Nietzsche may have contracted syphilis is passingly commented upon with only a slight reference to Mann’s grander allusions to it in his novel Doctor Faustus. Rather, the book is well researched and is composed with descriptive care to fill in the setting. The historical facts are treated like a pre-composed libretto needing only to be pieced together and then inlayed by the greater orchestral composition that is Prideaux’s text. I imagine that some may be critical of the divagations into other notable individual’s lives, such as Wagner and Förster, but I found these to be sparse and refreshing. Nietzsche lived during an exceptional time (the Paris Commune, the Franco-Prussian War, emergence of Symbolism, etc.) and many of the individuals, both greater and lesser known, he was personally acquainted with. As such, I take these additions to be an asset to the whole in their providing important context to Nietzsche’s acquaintance and reciprocating influence.

“Incipit Tragoedia. When Zarathustra was thirty years old, he left his home and the Lake of Urmi, and went into the mountains. There he enjoyed his spirit and his solitude, and for ten years did not weary of it. But at last his heart changed,” begins aphorism 342 of The Gay Science. The same could be said of that fateful day in Turin during the winter of 1889, Incipit Tragoedia, when he finally went under and succumbed to the madness within which he would spend just over the next ten years. His final decade of life is heartbreaking to read about and Prideaux spares no punches in defending his legacy with a detailed account of the (mis)appropriations of his thought. Some may be turned off by the pointed depiction of his sister Elisabeth’s machinations, but Nietzsche’s legacy had ruthlessly been controlled by her and to dire purposes for decades after his death. Prideaux does an excellent job documenting and debunking many false impressions that have been attributed to Nietzsche over the years without, however, denying that his thought does lend itself to such interpretation and abuse.

In terms of scholarship and engagement of style, Prideaux’s portrait is masterfully executed and artfully composed to the aim of defending Nietzsche’s legacy as a philosopher of ‘perhaps.’

[Marks54]

I had not read a full biography of Nietzsche before. I had tried to work through some of his major works in college and knew of the odd course that his writings had taken after his death, but lack any sense of a life trajectory. That always struck me as odd for a philosopher/essayist who has proven to be so influential. Sue Prideaux has written a readable and engaging biography of Nietzsche that has helped to fill these holes for me.

Having said this, I do not know that I am much clearer about actually “getting” Nietzsche. The book clearly communicates the role of his thought in identifying how modernism has weakened the ability of religion and philosophy to provide meaning and value for people, provided that the levelling tendencies of modern thought are followed through consistently and honestly. That was already fairly clear to me. Prideaux’s account highlights the problem that such a philosophy presents - how does one find meaning in a world with no certainty and no principles - a philosophy of “perhaps”. That this would pose tensions for individuals trying to justify a place in the world is clear and the path that Nietzsche steered through the neighborhoods of madness is not surprising. It was a basic part of his own story line.

There are a few aspects to Nietzsche’s story as told here that were striking to me.

First, what an odd intellectual environment he worked in! He gets a professorship in philology without completing any degree because of two influential mentors. Then he begins to move in completely different directions away from philology and towards philosophy such that students stop signing up for his courses. He then eventually leaves the university and wanders around Central Europe going to scenic areas writing books that nobody read and whose format was more understandable as driven by his health than by any content. He did not attain much success at all in his lifetime. I have trouble getting my head around just how different this intellectual world is from anything today, especially in big time philosophy.

Second, you have to love family, right? How the influence of his mother and especially his sister was associated with Nietzsche’s work is hard to comprehend, especially on substantive issues that affected how his work has been viewed since his death (antisemitism). It is hard to see how his legacy could have not been confused given the particularities of his estate and its managers.

Third, the limitations of 19th century medicine are striking and one wonders what was really going on, both in terms of his inherited physical disorders and the bizarre treatments he received. The link between the social/cultural and physical aspects of insanity are striking.

Fourth, he received virtually no recognition during his lifetime (when he would have been sane enough to recognize it). Add to that the shift in intellectual life at the turn of the century and it seems like a bad joke on the part of the gods at Nietzsche’s expense. Throw in WW1 and the Nazis and the story only gets stranger. The strange relationship with Wagner and his mistress is part of this and a separate strange part of the cultural story.

Finally, the book makes me want to tour Switzerland and northern Italy. I had actually visited Basel and Lucerne prior to reading the book and now want to go back.

This was a fun book to read, even while trying to sort through Nietzsche’s aphorisms.

[Hussein saad]

يذكر الكاتب و الروائي اليوناني نيكوس كازانتزاكيس في أحد فصول سيرته
بأنه كان يسمع الناس في شبابه يتحدثون عن فيلسوف مثير للجدل يطلق على نفسه عبوة الديناميت ! .. كانوا يسخرون من هذا اللقب ويخبرون نيكوس كلما سأل عنه ، بأنه ليس عبوة ديناميت أنه عبوة صفيح فارغه تصدر صوت الخواء اذا أقتربت منها . لكن نيكوس كان عاقلاً وتراجع عن سماعه لكلامهم ؛ وقرأ له أول مؤلف يقع في يده .. هذا هو الإنسان ، وكان عبارة أنا لست بشريا انا عبوة ديناميت هي المستهل ! ، أعجب الكاتب العظيم بشخصية نيتشه وكم هو مثير للأهتمام ولكنه بحاجة لأزالة الغمامه عنه .!

كتب نيكوس لاحقاً ؛ أن نيتشه أكثر الفلاسفة أخلاصاً لأفكاره وما يتحدث عنه من أمور سببت لي جرحاً في ذهنيتي . عزيزي القارئ .. أنت على مشارف الخوض في سبر أغوار شخصية نيتشه بقلم الباحثة وكاتبة السير الذاتية سو بريدو ، في 510 صفحة ؛ أنت تعيش حياة نيتشه على شكل فصول متتالية ؛ وكأنك تكبر معه وتتأثر لما يحل به وعليه من متغيرات فكرية ، لم تكن حياته سهله ومترفه كما يعتقد البعض ، أنها المأساة .. فمن رحم المعاناة والمرض ، ظهر نيتشه للعالم من خلال كتبه التي كان يكتبها بتنأني وبنظام الشذرات لأن مرضه كان أقوى من أن يقاوم وقت أطول في التفكير والكتابة بشكل مستمر . صحيح هناك الكثير من الكتب تحدثت عن نيتشه منها المقدمات القصيرة وكتاب دانيال بلو ، لكن هذه كتب تتحدث عن ماحول نيتشه من دراسة لشخصيته او تحليل لها ، أو قد تكون مقدمة تعريفيه سهلة لمن يود التعرف عليه ، لكن هذا الكتاب جمعهم كلهم في كفة واحدة .

تخلص من كل أفكارك ومعرفتك عن نيتشه ، والا لن تستمع بكلمة واحدة تقرأها داخل هذا الكتاب الرائع ؛ مهم جداً التنويه على موضوع اللغة والسرد داخل الكتاب ؛ فمن رأيي المتواضع يقع هذا الكتاب ضمن قائمة الكتب الثقيلة التي لا ترشح لأي شخص .. اللغة خالصة تماماً وقريبة للسرد ، والترجمة متمكنة وسلسله جداَ حتى لايذهب ذهنك بعيداً وتعتقد لأنها سيرة فيلسوف ستصأب بالملل .. على العكس !

كان بودي الحديث أكثر عنه لكن ماذا سأترك للقارئ ؟ أي متعة ستفوته اذا أكملت كتابة عنه !

[Evripidis Gousiaris]

Ο Nietzsche ολοκλήρωσε το Ecce Homo το 1908 για να μας γνωρίσει τον Άνθρωπο πίσω από τα βιβλία του. Η συγγραφέας με αυτό το βιβλίο μας γνωρίζει τον άνθρωπο.

Το βιβλίο είναι εξαιρετικό. Πρόκειται για κάτι παραπάνω από μια στεγνή βιογραφία. Δεν είναι μόνο η ζωή του Nietzsche αλλά και το ταλέντο και το ύφος της Sue Prideaux που σε κρατάει. Αν ο αναγνώστης έχει χρόνο δύσκολα θα το αφήσει από τα χέρια του.

Εκτός από την εξιστόρηση όλων των σημαντικών σημείων στην ζωή του Nietzsche, παρέχεται και αναλυτική παρουσίαση των προσώπων που τον σημάδεψαν. Αυτομάτως η αφήγηση ορισμένων γεγονότων και η ανάγνωση της αλληλογραφίας του αποκτάει άλλη χροιά.

Η συγγραφέας δεν γινόταν να παραλείψει την Ελίζαμπεθ, την αδερφή του Nietzsche. Διαβάζοντας το βιβλίο διαλύεται και η παραμικρή σύνδεση του Nietzsche με τους Ναζί και γίνεται σαφής η εκμετάλλευση του ίδιου και των κειμένων του από αυτή.

Για άλλη μια φορά, πρόκειται για εξαιρετικό βιβλίο. Παρότι βιογραφία το ύφος του κρατάει αμείωτο το ενδιαφέρον του αναγνώστη από την πρώτη έως την τελευταία σελίδα.

[کافه ادبیات]

کتاب من دینامیتم به شرح داستا‌ن‌گونه زندگی شورانگیز و شگفت‌آور فریدریش نیچه، فیلسوف مشهور قرن نوزدهمی می‌پردازد. این کتاب شرح فراز و فرودها، رنج‌ها و پریشانی‌های فیلسوفی است که در دوران زندگی‌اش قدرنادیده بود و تنها زمانی که در ورطه جنون گرفتار آمد، موردتوجه قرار گرفت.

سو پریدو، نویسنده کتاب من دینامیتم می‌کوشد در این کتاب تصویری خارق‌العاده از زندگی نیچه به مخاطبان نشان دهد و نقاط تاریک و روشن زندگی و مرگ نیچه را به تصویر بکشد.

نویسنده در این کتاب، درباره سیر تغییر و تحولات زندگی نیچه، از جوانترین استاد زبان‌شناسی دانشگاه بازل تا فیلسوفی مهجور و مجنون سخن می‌گوید. پریدو به خوبی نشان داده است که آدم‌های زندگی نیچه از خواهرش تا دوستانش چگونه بر فلسفه او اثر گذاشتند و چگونه نیچه به آن فیلسوف ارجمندی که امروز می‌شناسیم تبدیل شد.

این کتاب به خوبی درباره آثار نیچه، شرایطی که این کتاب‌ها در آن متولد شده‌اند و درون‌مایه آنها توضیح می‌دهد و بستری را برای نزدیک شدن به جهان و زیست‌محیط نیچه را فراهم می‌آورد.

[Troy]

Een werkelijk waar geweldige biografie. Nietzsche komt dichtbij. Bijna als een oude bekende, een verre vriend zelfs

[Domhnall]

"One might reject science as faith; one might reject religious faith itself but still retain moral values. First, man must become himself. Secondly, amor fati; he must accept what life brings, avoiding the blind alleys of self-hatred and ressentiment. Then finally man can overcome himself to find true fulfilment as the ubermensch, the man at peace with himself, finding joy in his earthly purpose, rejoicing in the sheer magnificence of existence and content with the finitude of his mortality.
Tragically for Nietzsche, the need to overcome ourselves became so blatantly distorted into the need to overcome others that it has tended to overshadow his ability to ask the eternal questions in such a gloriously provocative way. Similarly, his devotion to examining every facet of the truth and never recommending an answer beyond 'perhaps...' has afforded infinite potential for interpretation. " [p376]

This is a very clear and straighforward account of Nietzsche's life and writings, in chronological order. It provides reviews of his many books and key points from his developing philosophy in terms that are uncomplicated and accessible; it also emphasizes the extent to which his books incorporate biographical material and require a knowledge of the writer before the work can be understood.

"When the book was finished, he found himself astonished at how autobiographical the text was. It took him by surprise to see how his own blood dripped from the pages, but he felt cetain that only he would be able to see it. In his next book he was to pursue the idea that all philosophy (not only his own) was autobiography." [p240]

It gives a lengthy account of his dealings with Wagner, and explains very well the perverse impact on his reputation of his viciously anti-semitic sister and the Nazis, who controlled and misrepresented his unpublished writings for many years. This is essential as his reputation has been so sullied and his writing so misrepresented because of these associations that anyone approaching his work must first push their way through this barrier and only then hope to give the writing itself a fair hearing.

I think for many people this is going to be an excellent introduction to Nietzsche and will hopefully encourage them to go further and read some of his books.

[Paul Ataua]

A little too much life and too little thought for me, though, of course, one should expect that to be the core of a biography. The life part never seemed to get close enough to him, and the thought was just too far away. That he was taken to a brothel and played piano there, that he probably didn't have syphilis, and that Wagner wrote a letter to his doctor which seemed to have led to the breakdown in their friendship are not really tidbits. Yes, there were things of interest and in the end, it was worth the read, but I guess I wanted more.

[carl theaker]

Yes I too thought, oh a book about a philosopher, reading that would be like eating breakfast cereal without milk, but I still picked “I am Dynamite”, the title encouraged me, off the new book shelf at the library and thank goodness the author writes in a lively style, bringing out all the personalities of the various characters and boy, are there some.

Richard Wagner and Friedrich Nietzsche were contemporaries who I hadn’t realized, were also close friends for many years, though Wagner was twice his age. Of course, Wagner and wife Cosima are worth a few dozen books on their own, but this tale does a good job of showing their personal and artistic interactions. Throw in “Mad” King Ludwig II of Bavaria, who financed much of Wagner’s works and you have quite the cast. They both knew they were geniuses, and had no trouble reminding each other of that fact. Nietzsche had fluttering palpitations when listening to Wagner’s operas and Wagner insisted intellectuals appreciate Nietzsche’s writings.

They idolized each other artistically, but things got rough at times as Wagner and wife were keenly nationalistic and anti-semitic whereas Nietzsche was the opposite.

Aware of Nietzsche’s ‘bad boy of philosophers’ image, I read his major works back in my self education days and pretended like some of it soaked in, so it was somewhat a relief to see the big thinkers of his day tell him, “I like your work”, and more often - “I hate your work”, “but not sure I understand it”. So I am in good company.

Nietzsche is known for his witty-sayings...aphorisms, and it was interesting to learn that was the writing style in those days, everyone tried to fill a book full of short deep, meaningful thoughts.

Ironically, he published his most famous, popular and money making works just before he went totally insane, which was probably caused by the long term effects of syphilis, which 'softens the brain'.

Yet another wild character of the times, his uber-nationalistic, swindling, tyrannical sister, Elizabeth, stepped in to care for him in his last 11 years while he was becoming a world famous philosopher, without realizing it.

Long after Wagner and Nietzsche both had passed away, Cosima Wagner and Elisabeth both became grand-dames of sorts to the Third Reich. Wagner’s works and politics were more easily adapted to the Nazi philosophy, however Elisabeth worked hard to ensure her brother’s ideas and legacy were distorted to fit the political climate.

Major kudos to author Sue Prideaux who had to understand Nietzsche, Wagner, Schopenhauer and others well enough to explain their works to me. I’m sure there are many tomes available on Nietzsche, so this tale at about 400 pages, is the perfect size to cover the subject for an enjoyable good read and to understand “I am no man, I am dynamite!”.

[Majed Al Zaabi]

من العنوان واضح بأن الكتاب يتناول سيرة الفيلسوف الألماني فريدريك نيتشه ( ١٨٤٤ - ١٩٠٠ )
كتب نيتشه ذات يوم :
أعي قدري، يومًا ما سيقترن اسمي بذكرى حدث مخيف، بكارثة لم تُسبق بمثيل على وجه الأرض، بزلزلة لأعمق نقطة في الضمير، بوقفة حسم ضد كل ما ظل مُعتقدًا وضرورةً ومقدسًا حتى الآن، فأنا لستُ إنسانًا، أنا عبوة ديناميت .
.
حياة نيتشه منذ الولادة إلى الوفاة، مرورًا بمراحل الطفولة والمراهقة والنضج .
نشأته وتعليمه وحياته الأكاديمية وبداية تبلور أفكاره وفلسفته ، بداية الكتابة والنشر، ومعاناته مع الأمراض الجسدية والنفسية .
علاقاته مع عائلته وأصدقاءه ، وتناولت الكاتبة أيضًا حياة أهم المحيطين به مثل الموسيقي ريتشارد فاغنر وزوجته كوزيما وغيرهم .
.
وأيضًا تناولت الكاتبة حياة عائلة نيتشه ومعاناتهم مع الأمراض العقلية وخصوصًا والد نيتشه القس كارل لودفيغ ، وكيف أثرت على نيتشه .
* تم التحقيق على نطاق واسع في سبب تدهور حالة القس كارل لودفيغ نيتشه حتى الموت . فاحتمالية موت القس مجنونًا هي مسألة ذات أهمية كبيرة للأجيال القادمة لأن نيتشه نفسه عانى من أعراض مشابهة لأعراض والده قبل أن يُجن فجأة وبشكل دراماتيكي في عام ١غ٨٨٨ ، عندما كان في الرابعة والأربعين من عمره ، وبقي على حاله هذا حتى وفاته في عام ١٩٠٠

.
وأيضًا تكلمت عن شغف نيتشه بالفن والموسيقى خصوصًا .
وكيف كان يكتب وبمن تأثر وأثر ، معاناته مع المرض وسنوات حياته الأخيرة ، وكيف استغلت أخت نيتشه إيزابيل شهرة ومرض أخيها .. وأيضًا تحريف أفكار نيتشه واستغلالها من قبل القومية الإشتراكية أو النازية لأهداف سياسية وغيرها .
.
.
وأيضًا سبب التحول المهم في أفكار نيتشه وفقدانه الإيمان وإنكاره لوجود الإله .
والكثير الكثير من أهم مراحل وأفكار نيتشه لا يسعني تلخيصها بمراجعة بسيطة ومحدودة .
.
.
يقول البروفيسور فريدريش ريتشل معلقًا على نيتشه :
إنه لأمر عجيب حقًا كيف تعيش روحان بجوار بعضهما بعضًا في هذا الرجل ، فهو من ناحية يلتزم بأدق طرق البحث العلمي الأكاديمي ، ومن ناحية أخرى ، هذه الحماسة العاطفية العظيمة والرائعة للغاية والانغماس الكلي في الفاغنرية والشوبنهاورية العصية على الفهم ، في الفن والغموض والدين .
.
.
كتب نيتشه في كتاب هذا هو الإنسان :
الفلسفة كما فهمتها وعشتها حتى يومي هذا ، هي أن تعيش بحرية في الجليد وعلى الجبال الشاهقة ، والسعي خلف كل ماهو غريب ومدعاة للشك في الوجود ، وكل ما نبذته الأخلاق حتى يومنا هذا .
.
.
كتاب يستحق القراءة ، وأنصح كل من يرغب بدخول عالم نيتشه والقراءة له بأن يقرأ هذه السيرة .

[Borjbooks]

نشر برج مطالعه این کتاب را به شما توصیه می‌کند چرا که:

زندگینامه‌ای که سو پریدو نوشته است فقط به‌ کار اندیشمندان و ‍پژوهشگران دانشگاهی نمی‌آید، چه‌بسا اصلاً به ‌کار آن‌ها نیاید، اما کتابی مهم و خواندنی برای علاقه‌مندان به اندیشه و عقاید اوست، چرا که پریدو با تأکید بر گفته‌ی نیچه، که هر فلسفه‌ی بزرگی برآمده از خاطرات و اعترافات است، دست به نوعی افشاگری درباره‌ی او زده است تا سؤال‌های بسیاری را پاسخ دهد.

سرکشی به خصوصی‌ترین نقطه‌های زندگی نیچه، از روابط گوناگون گرفته تا انواع بیماری و انحراف که تأثیری مهم در اندیشه‌ی او داشته است.
جزئیاتی بی‌نظیر درباره‌ی زندگی روزمره، عادات و رفتار نیچه که از خلال دست‌نوشته‌های نزدیکانش به دست آمده است.

توصیفی دقیق و خواندنی از بیماری غریبی که نیچه را به فیلسوفی صاحب‌سبک با گفتاری گزنده و اندیشه‌‌ای پرشور تبدیل کرد. نیچه اهمیت بسیاری برای بیماری‌اش قائل بود و آن را سرچشمه‌ی خلاقیتش می‌‌دانست، به همین دلیل پریدو نیز اهمیت این بیماری را در کتابش نادیده نگرفته و از هر جهت در آن دقیق شده است.

نوشتن از علل به وجود آمدن بسیاری از گفته‌های مشهور نیچه همچون «خدا مرده است» که تحت ‌تأثیر اشعار هولدرلین گفته شده یا «سراغ زنان می‌روی تازیانه را فراموش نکن» که برگرفته از عکسی است مشهور. همچنین است بررسی آثاری که تحت ‌تأثیر زندگی او نوشته شده‌اند، دکتر فاستوس نوشته‌ی توماس مان را برگرفته از شخصیت نیچه می‌دانند و اشاره‌ي مان به اینکه شخصیت اصلی داستانش به فاحشه‌خانه‌ای می‌رود و روحش را می‌فروشد کنایه‌ای به رفتن نیچه به فاحشه‌خانه و درگیری او با بیماری سیفلیس است.

کتاب سو پریدو تنها زندگی‌نامه‌ای خواندنی درباره‌ی نیچه نیست، کتابی است درباره‌ی چندین شخصیت مهم تاریخ، از ریچارد و کوزیما واگنر تا الیزابت خواهر کوچک او که تأثیرگذارترین فرد زندگی او بوده است. شخصیت‌پردازی پریدو آن‌ها را به چهره‌هایی فراموش‌ناشدنی تبدیل کرده است.

کتاب پریدو اثری است الهام‌بخش برای بسیاری از زندگینامه‌نویسان که خلاقیت را به فراموشی سپرده‌اند، کسانی که تخیل را جایگزین تحقیق‌های سترگ کرده‌اند و همچنان شایعه را ارج می‌‌نهند.

[Melanie]

Eine spannend geschriebene Biografie mit gelungenen Zusammenfassungen der wichtigsten Gedanken Nietzsches. Leider fällt das Quellenverzeichnis relativ mager aus. Viele Thesen bleiben so unbelegt und werden somit zu Postulaten. Elisabeth Nietzsche als Quelle ist auch eher gewagt, zumal im Buch später deren Unzuverlässigkeit betont wird. Das ist der Hauptgrund für meinen Abzug in der Bewertung. Der Schreibstil ist leicht verständlich und eher einfach gehalten. Die Aphorismen-Auswahl am Schluss eine schöne Idee für Nietzsche-Anfänger*innen. Dem Buch eilte der Ruf voraus, besonders viele unbekannte Einblicke in Nietzsches Leben zu liefern. Das ist teilweise der Fall, aber durch die mangelhaften Nachweise dann auch wieder fast spekulativ. Begeistern konnte es mich nicht, aber als Einstieg und zur Unterhaltung ist es auf jeden Fall sehr gut geeignet.

[Pau]

No pensava que em pogués enganxar tant a una biografia d'un senyoro d'aquesta magnitud. Està molt bé perquè genera una molt bona prespectiva de la contemporaneitat i de com hem adquirit uns valors que la història recent ha anat alterant, però que són els mateixos de sempre. M'ha fotut molt nerviós que sempre estigués malalt.

[Minäpäminä]

Teennäisen koreasti kirjoitettu elämäkerta, joka keskittyi aivan liikaa Friedrichin siskoon. On sitä paitsi kohtuullisen huvittavaa roimia Elisabethin ym. kaltaistensa oikeistolaisia Nietzsche-tulkintoja Nietzschen "väärinymmärtämisestä", kun silloin oletetaan (contra Nietzsche), että on olemassa jokin objektiivisesti oikea tapa tulkita Nietzscheä. Hänen kirjoituksistaan löytyä aineksia monenlaiseen, melkein mihin tahansa, ja juuri siksi hän on ollut niin hedelmällinen hahmo.

Jos natsit vaikenivat Nietzschen kosmopoliittisuudesta, saksalaisvihasta ja yksilökeskeisyydestä, Prideaux ja hänen kaltaisensa kuohitsijat vuorostaan vaikenevat Nietzschen liberalismin, humanismin ja demokratianvastaisuudesta. Jos Nietzsche oli ja on jotakin niin luonnonvoima, jota ei kyetä kahlitsemaan eikä pullottamaan. Häntä ei voi valjastaa häräksi yhdenkään vaunun eteen. Ennemminkin hän on puhuri, joka voimiaan säästämättä työntää kaikkia niitä, joiden purjeet vain ovat avoinna vastaanottamaan hänen voimansa.

Muutenkin kirjan uskottavuus on paikoin hyvin kyseenalainen. Esimerkiksi: Oswald Spengler esitellään jonkinlaisena rivinatsina ja rotuteoreetikkona, jonka "kertakaikkisen keskinkertaista läsnäoloa" luonnehti "suusta tauotta pulppuava latteiden ja tyhjänpäiväisten iskulauseiden tulva". Kyseisessä kohdassa (s. 488) ei anneta tälle kuvaukselle minkäänlaista lähdettä eikä tehdä selväksi, kenen havaintoihin se perustuu. Kuvaus toimii myös esimerkkinä Prideaux'n ärsyttävän hyperbolisesta ja hömppäjournalistisesta kirjoitustyylistä, jossa yritetään "elävöittää" historiaa, mutta lopulta herätetään tyylitajuisessa lukijassa vain kiusaannusta ja myötähäpeää.

Tiiviisti ilmaistuna: tässä on sellainen Nietzsche-elämäkerta, josta New York Timesin ja The Economistin toimittajat voivat pitää, kuten niteen sisälievekin osaa kertoa.

[Zachary]

There is a lot of good to be found in this book, primarily the emphasis on Nietzsche's movements and prominent figures in his life. Don't take this to be a comprehensive introduction to his thinking, however. Prideaux seems more concerned with telling us what Nietzsche was doing than what he was thinking, or how those thoughts turned him into one of the greatest philosophers of our time. The book seems primarily concerned with the data of its subject rather than his character, though there are flashes where the person of Nietzsche shines through. This is not a bad book by any means, but neither is it a great one. It has a stupendously engaging title, and a few chapters throughout that manage to live up to the expectation it sets. The rest, much as it pains me to say, are rather uninteresting.