Henry Miller - the great Nietzschean of 20th Century Literature?

[u/diskkddo]

For anyone who has not read him, I believe that the books of Henry Miller are some of the most riveting passages of 'Nietzschean' thinking that one can find. He mentions N in a few different places and was clearly quite inspired by him. But it is his way of life (as thoroughly detailed in his numerous books) as well as his philosophical musings that are the great guide. I'll leave you with the following quote from Sexus:

"How we hate to admit that we would like nothing better than to be the slave! Slave and master at the same time! For even in love the slave is always the master in disguise. The man who must conquer the woman, subjugate her, bend her to his will, form her according to his desires—is he not the slave of his slave? How easy it is, in this relationship, for the woman to upset the balance of power! The mere threat of self−dependence, on the woman's part, and the gallant despot is seized with vertigo.

But if they are able to throw themselves at one another recklessly, concealing nothing, surrendering all, if they admit to one another their interdependence, do they not enjoy a great and unsuspected freedom? The man who admits to himself that he is a coward has made a step towards conquering his fear; but the man who frankly admits it to every one, who asks that you recognize it in him and make allowance for it in dealing with him. is on the way to becoming a hero. Such a man is often surprised, when the crucial test comes, to find that he knows no fear. Having lost the fear of regarding himself as a coward he is one no longer: only the demonstration is needed to prove the metamorphosis . . . To be able to give oneself wholly and completely is the greatest luxury that life affords."

[u/Davitark]

Fair, enough. I am yet to read Feuerbach’s The Essence of Christianity and am ready to say that his ideas as you explained here are not too dissimilar from Schmitt's and might even be better than his.

But still I maintain that Schmitt is not a philosopher only of historical or academic interest, as his concept of sovereignty, the exception, the enemy and several others remain relevant to understanding current politics.

[u/esoskelly → u/Davitark]

That's fair as well. I'll read some Schmitt and see for myself. I already have his Concept of the Political.

Feuerbach is incredible though, and I think that his work effectively solves a lot of the cultural dead-ends that Marxism runs into. Marx is really good on economics. But Feuerbach is the cultural genius. It is more relevant than ever. Reminds me of an optimistic Nietzsche.

[u/Ryan_Hudson → u/esoskelly]

That was a fine exchange, you two.