Is the Will to Power worth reading? I know some of the history

>>7660882
>edited by Kaufmann

Nietzsche was a staunch Nazi, and libcuck Kauffman (Jewish cultural marxist btw) tries to make him out as some sort of progressive liberal to help breed out whiteness.

Don't fall for it.

How badly was this thing fucked by those editors? Was an original never recovered?

You can skip the book if you read about it.

>>7660887
You pasta this every time. Kaufman was a fucking God. Nietzsche HATED nationalists & anti-semnites. His utterly evil sister 'edited' Will to Power, removing his opposition to Christianity & all sorts of stuff. Read Kaufmans Portable Nietzsche, the Basic Writings of Nietzsche & then his biography of Nietzsche. & SWTG anyway. & stop wasting my time & get out of my office!!!!

>>7660897
It was totally fucked. Also Nietzsche had already abandon it as a plan & moved onto better ideas before his collapse. Kaufman's biography goes over it in super painful detail, & it's extremely boring. The idiots we also very inconsistent, so they missed a lot of the things they were trying to edit out, because they didn't understand it. When you consider how paranoid Nietzsche was about being misunderstood or misrepresented, it's actually very tragic. Will to Power is probably only interesting to historians of philosophy who want to write super academic papers etc. There's no big hidden Nietzsche writing, it's all in his main works, particularly the final ones.

>>7660882
The will to power is apocryphal. You may read it if you want, but I think one should keep that in mind...

So, >>7660897
There is no original sensu stricto, it's a book basically made by Nietzsche's sister out of fragments. That isn't enough to make it a Nietzsche's book

>>7660882
Did he seriously write something called "The Will to Power"? That sounds like a shitty self-help book title.

>>7660887
Man you don't know what the fuck you're talking about lol

So this isn't one of his main works?
Well fuck...

read Thus Spoke Zarathustra though. Damn short and a good read

>>7660934
>>7660887
Wait, tell me more. Are Kaufman's translations accurate and true to the originals?
Cuz that's all I've read.
I liked the flow.

>>7662758
Why do you buy a book to end up regretting it because you didn't do any research what is and what isn't his main work?

Especially if it's from a widely known author like Nietzsche, just a glance at wikipedia would have been enough research to know what to buy

>>7662800
whatever he's got something by him.
He'll start where he starts.

>>7660953
>When you consider how paranoid Nietzsche was about being misunderstood or misrepresented,
If this is true, why did he wrote aphorism and shit that a lot of people claim to be ironic or unironic?
Nihilistic/anti-nihilistic
Antisemitism/anti-antisemitism
I honestly, by reading the shit people claim on lit, have no idea about what the actual ideas of this niga were

>>7662807
>by reading the shit people claim on lit
Because a lot of people think it's funny to call Friedrich a Nazi

His sister was a nazi
Nietzsche was an anti-nationalist, he didn't even get a German passport because he was anti-nationalist like that.

His "Übermensch" often gets confused with the Nazi "Übermensch" but there was nothing about racial supriority in Nietzsches work.
iirc Nazis also used edited works of Nietzsche as Nazi propaganda, probably to use Nietzsche as a dynamo during war time emergency as he was rolling in his grave.

Besides, Nietzsche was mentally a wreck by the time he was writing The Will to Power and experiencing psychosis.

>>7660887

Kaufmann is inferior to Hollingdale, but not for the reasons you stated

>>7662807
>I honestly, by reading the shit people claim on lit, have no idea about what the actual ideas of this niga were

hmm, i wonder what that could mean

>>7662840
Hollingdale and Kikemann worked hand in hand. Only Ludovici is an acceptable translator.

Is it advisable to read Nietzsche in publication order? One will then be able to see his advancement over the years.
Also someone said in his later writings he proved almost 80 percent of his previous work worng. Is that true?

>>7663980
read it chronologically and you're good

>>7660882
I don't remember exactly which book it was, but in the preface to one, I think it might have been Daybreak, he says "learn to read me well".
There is a clear evolution, and he is aware of it.

I'd say read WTP when you know him.

>>7663980
I'd say no. Leave Zarathustra last. Twilight of the Idols was written as a sort of introduction to Nietzsche, so start there. The rest can be read chronologically.

>>7663855
>not teratologen