Book Review: Monika M. Langer – Nietzsche’s Gay Science

Feb 18, 2011 by

For many years, Nietzsche studies in the English-speaking world were populated by comprehensive interpretations that focused on concepts, such as the will to power, the overman, and the eternal return, that were thought to be central to Nietzsche’s philosophical project.[1] More recently, however, a handful of scholars have turned away from this thematic approach to Nietzsche’s thought by focusing their scholarly efforts on the careful analysis of individual texts. The most notable example of this trend has been the recent explosion of work on Nietzsche’s On the Genealogy of Morals by prominent scholars such as Daniel Conway, Lawrence Hatab, Christopher Janaway, Brian Leiter, and David Owen.[2] In line with this movement, Monika Langer now offers a commentary on another of Nietzsche’s more popular texts, The Gay Science (GS). Although Langer’s work is a welcome addition to the secondary literature for its comprehensive, section-by-section approach to GS, her overly narrow focus on the contents of the individual aphorisms to the exclusion of broader reflections on the complex genesis of the text, the role the text plays in Nietzsche’s free-spirit project, and the potential relationship of the text to his larger oeuvre compromises the depth and quality of her commentary.

via Monika M. Langer – Nietzsche’s Gay Science: Dancing Coherence – Reviewed by Matthew Meyer, The University of Scranton – Philosophical Reviews – University of Notre Dame.

  • Pingback: Tweets that mention Book Review: Monika M. Langer – Nietzsche’s Gay Science | Continental Philosophy -- Topsy.com

  • Pingback: Book Review: Monika M. Langer – Nietzsche's Gay Science … | ReviewTica

  • Aporia Inc

    There really isn’t much by way of monograph length, introductory commentary focused exclusively GS.  So I’m inclined to qualify ‘narrow focus on the contents of individual aphorisms’ and suggest that the text isn’t a scholarly contribution per se, eve, if it makes a few gestures in that direction, but a book best suited for students coming to grips with Nietzsche’s work.  So in this sense, it’s very helpful as a starting point, a claim, I think, consistent, with FE’s correct observations.  Otherwise put, given the current state of things, unlike the overwhelming amount of expository work on GM, Langer’s book has less company and provides a good a place to start (with regards to GS) as anything currently available…though I’m happy to stand corrected…