Zarathustra in Nietzsche’s Typology
1
Zarathustra in Nietzsche’s Typology
Yunus Tuncel
In this essay, I present a reading of Zarathustra as a type within the context of Nietzsche’s typology which permeates his works from the first to the last; I claim that there is a line of thought in Nietzsche’s philosophy, despite the many turning points in it, which pertains to types and which I call typology.1 This typology culminates in Thus Spoke Zarathustra which is considered a work of typology, for the purpose of this presentation, without disregarding the other ways it has been interpreted. Moreover, typology as a philosophical area of research has not received sufficient attention in Nietzsche interpretations although there are many commentaries on the overman and Zarathustra.
Before presenting Zarathustra as a type, I will briefly discuss the questions of type and typology in Nietzsche, bring up other types from his works and suggest possible ways of reading his typology.
I
Typology is not only a study of types2 which embody certain human traits and tendencies, but is also a philosophical framework which shows how such studies can be done, that is, the method
1
To the extent of my research, the closest German word to typology, “Typenlehre”—which literally translates as the doctrine or teaching of types and which is translated as “typology” by Walter Kaufmann—appears only in one text, namely Aphorism 186 in Beyond Good and Evil. There are, however, many other implicit or explicit hints to the study of types throughout Nietzsche’s works.
2
Characters in literature can be said to have affinity to types since the former too represent certain traits of human existence in context. In this sense, to read Nietzsche’s typology along with the literature of his age, especially the authors whom he calls “the psychologist of types” in Ecce Homo, would intensify the reading. Persistence of a philosophical project, however, distinguishes philosophical typology from other typologies.
Zarathustra in Nietzsche’s Typology
Yunus Tuncel
In this essay, I present a reading of Zarathustra as a type within the context of Nietzsche’s typology which permeates his works from the first to the last; I claim that there is a line of thought in Nietzsche’s philosophy, despite the many turning points in it, which pertains to types and which I call typology.1 This typology culminates in Thus Spoke Zarathustra which is considered a work of typology, for the purpose of this presentation, without disregarding the other ways it has been interpreted. Moreover, typology as a philosophical area of research has not received sufficient attention in Nietzsche interpretations although there are many commentaries on the overman and Zarathustra.
Before presenting Zarathustra as a type, I will briefly discuss the questions of type and typology in Nietzsche, bring up other types from his works and suggest possible ways of reading his typology.
I
Typology is not only a study of types2 which embody certain human traits and tendencies, but is also a philosophical framework which shows how such studies can be done, that is, the method
1
To the extent of my research, the closest German word to typology, “Typenlehre”—which literally translates as the doctrine or teaching of types and which is translated as “typology” by Walter Kaufmann—appears only in one text, namely Aphorism 186 in Beyond Good and Evil. There are, however, many other implicit or explicit hints to the study of types throughout Nietzsche’s works.
2
Characters in literature can be said to have affinity to types since the former too represent certain traits of human existence in context. In this sense, to read Nietzsche’s typology along with the literature of his age, especially the authors whom he calls “the psychologist of types” in Ecce Homo, would intensify the reading. Persistence of a philosophical project, however, distinguishes philosophical typology from other typologies.