2025.11.07

Ok. Major breakthrough, obviously. I'm on part four of Zarathustra but that's beside the point. I recently read an article about a review of a new translation of a German biography of Herr Nietzsche from the Gay & Lesbian Review (naturally). Obviously I leapt at the opportunity to speculate on the homosexuality of someone I respect intellectually (haha). So now Nietzsche is gay, hold that idea roll it around in your hands feel it up get to know it. Hm, I wonder why he has such a bone to pick with Christianity and wants to return to the Greeks (golden ge of homosexual pederasty). Nietzsche is part of a grand tradition of precious little flower haughty intellectual fags that totally bemoan the state of the world and their times at every opportunity. It's a beautiful thing to be a totally misanthropic bitchy old queen! Also being totally consumed by Mother and Sister reminds me of Mishima and his childhood being sickly and consigned to the chthonian swamp of his grandmother (fact check?). Apparently great environment for this overworking of the strong-willed homosexual mind. Even on a basic level, he is a kvetcher. He has these grand narratives of the Last Man and a great critique of a kind of modernity that we are totally consumed by now, but he loves to whittle that down to minor gripes about how a whitewashed home speaks to a deeper anti-vitalism in the homeowner. Right at the beginning of Beyond Good & Evil he pronounces that all philosophers lie about being objective and are totally driven by their instincts, feelings, and whims, and that he will be honest about that. This is a beautiful natural cycle, something small annoys you, interrogate why it offends you so deeply, run it all the way up the flag pole to the degree that someone's house color or sartorial choices are indicative of not only a failing of personal psychology but a mass social phenomena of misguided fools ruining the earth for those of us with taste and sensibility.

2025.10.09

Reading through the first part of Zarathustra but still ruminating on the whole issue of master morality and slave morality from Geneology of Morals and Beyond Good & Evil. This noble ideal of positively defining good and orienting oneself towards it versus the slave ideal of definitely oneself negatively against evil. This speaks to a deeper sentiment he expresses often of forming his philosophy in a positive way out in this productive manner, he draws on such a broad range of references and is clearly so well read even when he is critiquing some philosophy of the past (spinoza comes to mind) he is still using their ideas productively to continue his process. Definitely seeing the throughline here to Deleuze's whole thing about the creation of concepts. His whole constructed discourse between Rome and Jerusalem, Master and Slave, feels like he tends towards this noble ideal, but almost insofar as he sets himself contra the times he's found himself in, but it still feels like there has to be a tension there. Although he's non-dialiectical, he still comes up with these dichotomies to illustrate his points. The other one to discuss here is the opposing forces of Apollo and Dionysus, which he also puts in this position of Apollo over Dionysus while still stressing the importance of the tension between the two. I'm open to just calling this preference of Apollo over Dionysus, Rome over Jerusalem, a simple matter of contrarianism and Nietzsche's general antagonistic vibe, but the notion of unequal duologies I recently encountered learning a bit about Incan religion. Similar thing with both elements being important as what really matters is the interplay, but ultimately one (masculine) force is stronger- not really going there but worth noting. Zarathustra is so far impenetrable on the level of prose but I am enjoying the poetic beauty of it.