default header

Theory

An Insomniac's Reading List

Moderator: JC Denton

Unread postby ViewtifulZFO » 06 May 2009 18:49

I've got a full lot of Nietzsche books on my table, and I'll finally have time to read them.

However, I do have one question regarding your list: did you put The Will to Power on there hoping the reader would understand it as a heavily edited posthumous work (considering everything that came before), or as actual bits of Nietzsche's world view?

If you are dealing with children, as you say often, I would not give the reader that much credit (myself included) in deciphering "between the lines", so to speak.
ViewtifulZFO
 
Joined: 29 Mar 2008 18:18

Unread postby icycalm » 06 May 2009 20:57

The Will to Power is a collection of Nietzsche's notes. The notes have not been messed with -- they've been rearranged, but not edited for content. So they reflect Nietzsche's thinking on whatever subjects they touch, at the time in which he wrote them -- just like all his published work. There's no fundamental difference between the notes and the rest -- only pedantic scholars have a problem with them.

So yeah, there's no need to decipher between any lines -- here or anywhere else. Whatever the man has to say is in the actual lines.
User avatar
icycalm
Hyperborean
 
Joined: 28 Mar 2006 00:08
Location: Tenerife, Canary Islands

Unread postby dA » 07 May 2009 23:32

icycalm wrote:Many of these are just single essays, but I mean, yeah. His "genuine-ideas-per-number-of-words" ratio is far, far lower than those of people like Montaigne or Nietzsche.

Then again, his ideas ARE very hard ones to grasp, so I guess the extra material might be helpful to those who have trouble doing so...

Then AGAIN, he COULD have explained his ideas in much simpler terms if he wanted to... or at least I THINK he could...

Yeah, Baudrillard still perplexes me a bit. I am not sure how much WILLFUL obscurantism there is in his work. Perhaps he really could not express himself in simpler terms. Perhaps he didn't want to because by embellishing his prose he made it sound more poetic, and therefore more enjoyable to read as prose, as opposed to as philosophy. Perhaps he only did it for the extra money...

Maybe you've thought of this already, but I think I can explain this reaction to the writing of Baudrillard. I just started reading In The Shadow of the Silent Majorities (in my own language it suddenly transforms into the most enjoyable writing style I've ever come across) and the description on the back was very helpful:

Baudrillard doesn't come with a new philosophy. He tries to explain his ideas in the most precise manner possible, using the most advanced theories and philosophies. He doesn't add new theories and vocabulary (except when he has to, as in the case of hyper-reality and simulacrum), even though he could. He shows the limits of the existing concepts and leaves the task to the reader.

He has something to say in his work, but that will be fully grasped at one time. But his work will then still be relevant because it are also great training exercises in doing the same as he: to explore the limits of our concepts and to ultimately go beyond them.

He could explain it a lot more simply, but in the long run it's better to teach this to others.
dA
 
Joined: 26 Mar 2009 20:40
Location: Utrecht, Netherlands

Unread postby icycalm » 08 May 2009 17:46

dA wrote:and the description on the back was very helpful:


Where is the description? I can't tell which of the following comments are yours or the book's. That's what quotations marks (these symbols -> "") are for. So use them.

dA wrote:Baudrillard doesn't come with a new philosophy.


Great, thanks for clearing that up.

dA wrote:He tries to explain his ideas in the most precise manner possible, using the most advanced theories and philosophies.


Theories AND philosophies. As if there is a difference. Or as if philosophers ever did anything other than "try to explain their ideas in the most precise manner possible".

dA wrote:He doesn't add new theories and vocabulary


Yeah, well, perhaps not in the little world you inhabit. In THIS world, however, Baudrillard adds more theories and more vocabulary (and intentionally abstruse vocabulary) than any other genuine philosopher ever.

dA wrote:He shows the limits of the existing concepts and leaves the task to the reader.


Quite a little novel you have written for yourself there. It flatters you too, of course. All stupid readers like to think that good writers leave the thinking to them.

dA wrote:He has something to say in his work, but that will be fully grasped at one time.


Yes, god forbid that anyone grasp it NOW. It will all be grasped "at some future time". When we are all dead, our kids, who will be smarter than us, will grasp everything.

dA wrote:But his work will then still be relevant because it are also great training exercises in doing the same as he: to explore the limits of our concepts and to ultimately go beyond them.


Once you have grasped what a book has to say, the book, for you, becomes irrelevant. That's what "going beyond" means.

dA wrote:He could explain it a lot more simply, but in the long run it's better to teach this to others.


To teach WHAT, moron? Teaching IS explaining -- there is no difference between these concepts. If you explain something more simply then you also teach it more simply -- and if you intentionally explain something less simply, then why bother? The less simply you explain something the harder it is to be understood, and if you take this process to its limit you get to the point where the reader is better off not reading your book altogether and simply trying to find the answers on his own.
User avatar
icycalm
Hyperborean
 
Joined: 28 Mar 2006 00:08
Location: Tenerife, Canary Islands

Unread postby dA » 08 May 2009 19:40

icycalm wrote:Where is the description? I can't tell which of the following comments are yours or the book's. That's what quotations marks (these symbols -> "") are for. So use them.


I tried to incorporate it into the entire post, but that was clearly stupid. I think it's best to translate what's on the back (at least the relevant part).

Baudrillard's method of arguing is a challenge to the reader. He doesn't come with a new philosophy, he doesn't write a closed story and doesn't come with a fixed point of view. His work is about turning around, to think through the thoughts of others so consequent that they become laughable. Baudrillard: "If you want to work something it, it doesn't have any use to exhaust solid concepts, that's useless. You have to reach beyond your own text while writing it. The same goes for the reader. If everything is already filled in, there's nothing to be read."
dA
 
Joined: 26 Mar 2009 20:40
Location: Utrecht, Netherlands

Unread postby raphael » 13 May 2009 22:09

I am currently discovering Badrillard with "The Consumer Society". I enjoy it a lot. Thanks for pointing me to this guy.

I guess the book is a good introduction to the rest of his writings. Am I right?
User avatar
raphael
 
Joined: 04 Mar 2008 19:31
Location: Paris

Unread postby mees » 14 May 2009 02:05

I'm surprised at how many people here are enjoying Baudrillard. I picked up one of his books on a whim (Simulacra and Simulations) and, predictably, couldn't make any sense of it at all. I guess everyone here has just been at philosophy for many more years than I, or...
mees
 
Joined: 30 Sep 2008 02:51

Unread postby icycalm » 14 May 2009 18:50

raphael wrote:I guess the book is a good introduction to the rest of his writings. Am I right?


Yes. I envy you for being able to read the original.

mees wrote:I'm surprised at how many people here are enjoying Baudrillard.


Yes, all three or four of them.

mees wrote:I picked up one of his books on a whim (Simulacra and Simulations) and, predictably, couldn't make any sense of it at all. I guess everyone here has just been at philosophy for many more years than I, or...


Banned for the "or..."
User avatar
icycalm
Hyperborean
 
Joined: 28 Mar 2006 00:08
Location: Tenerife, Canary Islands

Unread postby raphael » 06 Jun 2009 01:03

I am puzzled, but could not ask a simple question at this point. So I'd just like to ask for a couple of simple advices.

I just finished "The Consumer society". I enjoyed the reading a lot, and understood a lot, even if sometimes only on an instinctive level. Yet a few apparently central concepts remain too abstract for me now.

I know I read the book too fast (actually I devoured it) and I'd need to read it at the very least one more time for a better understanding, or even to find out specific questions to ask.

So, do you suggest I do exactly that: re-read? Or later books are more important and there is a chance I understand them as his ideas and jargon slowly sink in?

I bought "Simulacra and simulation" and with the second page I read he already talks of "second-order simulacra" (with reference to his "Symbolic exchange and death" earlier book)... another one whose prior reading you'd suggest, or is he just cross-referencing for the sake of it?

I am definitely not scared of fighting my way through, nor am I totally lost at this point. But I don't want to waste my time taking an unnecessarily hard path.
User avatar
raphael
 
Joined: 04 Mar 2008 19:31
Location: Paris

Unread postby icycalm » 06 Jun 2009 18:42

"Symbolic Exchange" is very difficult, very demanding. Read "Simulacra" first, and don't worry about references to previous works. Just keep going, and eventually it will all make sense. You will get used to his jargon, you will be exposed to the same ideas a dozen different times in a dozen different ways, and you'll eventually be able to make sense of it all. HE doesn't connect the dots for you, unfortunately, like Nietzsche and earlier philosophers did, so the dot-connecting has been left to you. But if you simply keep reading it will happen. And do not go back to a book you've already read until you've read many of them. Let the ideas grow in your subconscious for a while, and when you revisit them you will see how much they've grown into and out of each other.

Also note that his books "America" and "Cool Memories" (Cool Memories I, II, III, etc. -- there are five of them) are basically applications of his theories. Examples, in a sense. So it's a good idea to always be reading one of them at the same time with the theoretical (and thus more difficult) works.
User avatar
icycalm
Hyperborean
 
Joined: 28 Mar 2006 00:08
Location: Tenerife, Canary Islands

Unread postby raphael » 06 Jun 2009 19:08

Thank you for the advice.
User avatar
raphael
 
Joined: 04 Mar 2008 19:31
Location: Paris

Unread postby raphael » 02 Oct 2009 13:08

I finished Simulacra and Simulation. I begin to get used to his awkward writing and ideas, and see through some of it. I still can't make a clear concept out of it all, but I like his way of thinking and start to feel some influence on mine.

In a strange way, the man is fun.

I proceeded to the short "Pourquoi tout n'a-t-il pas déjà disparu ?" (2007) (which could translate into: "Why hasn't everything disappeared yet ?"). And now I am reading "L'autre par lui-même" (1992) (translation: "The other by himself").

"The consumer society" got me interested in better understanding the french revolution era (which, even to a french schoolboy, is a dark mess). So, at the same time as Baudrillard, I am now reading "The Age of Revolution: Europe 1789-1848" by Eric J. Hobsbawn. It's not that great , but reading it with Baudrillard in mind is pretty enlightening. An analysis of Britain's industrial revolution, in particular, opened my eyes.

Next on my list will be "Cool Memories", "Symbolic exchange" and maybe Wittgenstein's Tractatus.

I previsouly wanted to read "The Transparency of Evil" and "The Intelligence of Evil". But is it still important after I read the extracts you picked?
Last edited by raphael on 03 Oct 2009 11:04, edited 3 times in total.
User avatar
raphael
 
Joined: 04 Mar 2008 19:31
Location: Paris

Unread postby losganados » 02 Oct 2009 22:32

icycalm wrote:Note that none of this is a substitute for the reading list I have already provided. These essays are simply a kind of "preview" of what you'll be getting when and if you decide to tackle the Baudrillard section of the reading list. I hope you'll enjoy reading them.


http://forum.insomnia.ac/viewtopic.php?p=11265#11265
losganados
 
Joined: 12 Mar 2009 04:06
Location: RI, USA

Unread postby raphael » 03 Oct 2009 02:36

My bad, I forgot I read that. Thanks for pointing.
User avatar
raphael
 
Joined: 04 Mar 2008 19:31
Location: Paris

Unread postby icycalm » 03 Oct 2009 09:40

The Transparency of Evil is the easier of the two. Well, apart from its last 2-3 chapters.

And yeah, Baudrillard is really a lot of fun. He cracks jokes constantly, but it's difficult to see them.
User avatar
icycalm
Hyperborean
 
Joined: 28 Mar 2006 00:08
Location: Tenerife, Canary Islands

Unread postby icycalm » 21 Dec 2009 00:05

A slightly updated version of the reading list can be found at the bottom of this page:

http://insomnia.ac/books/
User avatar
icycalm
Hyperborean
 
Joined: 28 Mar 2006 00:08
Location: Tenerife, Canary Islands

Unread postby hyac » 21 Dec 2009 11:21

So you finally have release dates!

I can't wait!
Last edited by hyac on 21 Dec 2009 11:22, edited 1 time in total.
hyac
 
Joined: 26 Sep 2009 22:02

Unread postby zinger » 21 Dec 2009 11:22

Nice! I'm really looking forward to these!
User avatar
zinger
 
Joined: 22 Oct 2007 16:32
Location: Sweden

Unread postby icycalm » 21 Dec 2009 20:55

The release date thingies are very rough estimates. Don't get your hopes too high -- I am a master procrastinator. Still, I've given you two dozen extremely difficult books to read, so it's not like you don't have anything to do while you wait.
User avatar
icycalm
Hyperborean
 
Joined: 28 Mar 2006 00:08
Location: Tenerife, Canary Islands

Unread postby Choking » 02 Jan 2010 03:31

My copy of "Beyond Good and Evil" was not translated by Kaufmann or Hollingdale, but by a woman named Helen Zimmern. Does anybody know if her translation is accurate or not?
Choking
 
Joined: 04 Jun 2009 11:06

Unread postby NighAligned » 05 Jan 2010 22:55

I've only read Kaufmann's translation of Beyond Good and Evil in full from Basic Writings of Nietzsche and excerpts translated by Marion Faber. Kaufmann briefly mentioned Zimmern's translation, in his introduction to Beyond Good and Evil: “In preparing the present edition [Kaufmann's translation in the Basic Writings of Nietzsche], I hoped at first that I might merely revise her version, modernizing her somewhat Victorian prose and correcting mistakes; but I soon gave up. The mistakes were too numerous, and in Nietzsche's case nuances are so important that it would be difficult to say at what point an infelicitous rendering becomes downright wrong.”

Taking that with what icycalm wrote earlier in the thread that the best translations are by Kaufmann and Hollingdale, I would recommend that you read one of those.

Beyond that, I find it pretty helpful, if you have a basic grasp of German grammar, to look at the German text of Nietzsche's writings along with a German-English dictionary when I can't decipher the right syntax of a sentence or meaning of a word in a passage in the English translation. I think Hollingdale's translations are the most faithful from what I've read so far.
User avatar
NighAligned
 
Joined: 30 Jun 2009 08:03

Unread postby deusmeister » 11 Jan 2010 00:56

In case anyone is interested, here is the preface for The Quantum Nietzsche, which was removed from Google Books.

http://meta-religion.com/Philosophy/Bio ... tszche.htm
deusmeister
 
Joined: 25 Aug 2009 05:30

Unread postby icycalm » 22 Feb 2010 21:17

This is a pretty good, succinct summary of the Genealogy:

http://www.unc.edu/~megw/Nietzsche.html
User avatar
icycalm
Hyperborean
 
Joined: 28 Mar 2006 00:08
Location: Tenerife, Canary Islands

Unread postby Peter » 31 Mar 2010 08:48

Considering that the Greeks are a major influence on Nietzsche's writing, would it be useful to have a good understanding of Greek history? If so, are there any books that you would recommend?
User avatar
Peter
 
Joined: 28 Mar 2010 00:46
Location: Charleston

Unread postby icycalm » 31 Mar 2010 13:56

Dude, I grew up in Greece. I've read many history books, but the ones they give you at school.

Just rent Troy, 300 and Alexander and you are set.
User avatar
icycalm
Hyperborean
 
Joined: 28 Mar 2006 00:08
Location: Tenerife, Canary Islands

PreviousNext

Return to Theory

cron