Zarathustra and the Four Great Errors

  • Is there a necessary connection between destruction and creativity, as Nietzsche suggests? Does great art require suffering?
  • What does Zarathustra mean when he says that “The overman is the meaning of the earth? What are the ways you see people “blaspheme against the earth?”

Zarathustra is a character made to play as the counterpart of Christ or Socrates, coming down with great wisdom that no one wants to take part in. No one is listening to his Dionysian way of thinking, and prefer to stick to the Apollisean way that they are used to. He thinks to himself often that he is “not the mouth for [their] ears,” as nothing he brings up can be accepted by the majority of people in the square.

He goes on about mainly how God, or any God, is dead, and that is is our responsibility to save ourselves rather than to wait for him to save us in death. This is an inflammatory statement and idea to say the least, as the common people are not used to anyone not believing in a god or that we must be saved for the afterlife. Zarathustra argues that we (his readers and the audience in the story) should be the new meaning of the earth, or the ubermensch. The Ubermensche, loosely translated as the Overman, is a would be God who is true to the physical earth, as he sets his own rules for how he lives so long as no one is purposely hurt. Sadly, though this thought of anyone being godlike appeals to people, it is not something that the ‘normal people’ are happy or willing to hear.

Going off of his Dionysian thinking, I can say that creation and destruction are hand in hand. You cannot create something without breaking it in, or making it out of multiple things you take from the earth. Dionysian ways of thinking involves an awareness of the darker side of life, and focuses on the darkness as vital to truly living. It sounds depressing, like you’d only be sad all the time, or like you focus on things that make you unhappy. When you take this into account with the fact that life is half and half good and bad, ignoring half of it seems like a delusion. It makes it out to be less focused on half of life that matters just as much as the happy half.

With creativity, I do believe that good art makes you feel something deep within, and that sad art has an amazing way of making evoking emotions from you by just existing as art. Good art can evoke the same emotions, but the more powerful ones come from the sadder art. Great art is enhanced by suffering inside of it, or being a product of suffering, but not all great art is great because of the sadness it carries.

When Zarathustra saws that “the overman is the meaning of the earth,” he means it in the sense that god is gone and has passed the earth down to us. We now need to take the responsibility of the earth and the physical world. I see that people blaspheme the earth by acting like nothing they do can hurt the earth, as if we don’t live on earth and directly affect it. No one else is here but us to care for it, but the way we decide against caring for it speaks volumes about how disconnected we are from where we live.

Word Count: 586

4 thoughts on “Zarathustra and the Four Great Errors

  1. Very cool post, I especially vibed with how you made sure to mention that great art is not necessarily great because of the sadness or suffering that it holds. While noble and at times tragic, I think that some artists have fetishized suffering for the sake of their art, even when the suffering wasn’t necessary. But like you said, all things are not without suffering and it’d be mistaken to ignore that aspect of anything, art included.

    Like

    1. I agree. The point of the pain should be that we got through it and we are moving on stronger, but the focus on fetishized pain is an eternal pain where nothing is gained and you constantly lose. It makes for an unhealthy headspace, usually resulting in all bad things after and during, not letting any of that pain go. That in general is a sad way of living, edge or not, try to find closure and chill a little, it’s the past, know what I mean? Conveying emotions in art is fine with pain, but the quality of art shouldn’t only be about that suffering.

      Like

  2. I like your point on creation and destruction go hand in hand. We create wooden chairs for us to rest on lets say after a long day of volunteer work for ones greatest passion of Making Tahoe Blue again. However the chair itself is from chopping down trees, further harming our environment. Leading into the fact that life is half good half bad because without the bad, the lighter moments wouldn’t seem as good especially once the bad are resolved and vice versa, it’s a constant cycle that cannot be broken.

    Like

Leave a comment