I very soon noticed that such talk is nothing good do not result

After the first introductory course I became a Junior assistant at the Department
anatomy, and next semester the Professor has appointed me responsible for
the course of histology, which suited me just fine. Most of all I was interested in
moreover, from a purely morphological point of view, evolutionary theory and
comparative anatomy, I was also familiar with neovitalism. But it was different
dealing with physiology: I have been deeply unpleasant all those  vivisection, which
was made, in my opinion, solely for the purpose of visual demonstration. Me
had the thought that animals are akin to us that they are not just machines,
used for demonstration experiments. So I missed
laboratory classes, as often as he could. I realized that the experiments on
useful animals, but their demonstration seemed to me a terrible and barbaric,
and most importantly, I didn't see it necessary. My overly developed imagination
allowed to submit the entire procedure for one only scant description.
My empathy for animals was based not on the allusions shopengauera
philosophy, and had deeper roots - going back to ancient times
the unconscious identification of himself with animals. At the time, of course, I
knew nothing about this psychological factor. My aversion to physiology
was so great that I passed the exam with great difficulty. But still
passed.
 In subsequent clinical semesters I was so busy that I have
absolutely no time was left for anything else. I could read Kant, only
on Sundays, when I grew interested and Hartmann. By including in its
the program also Nietzsche, I did not dare to urge him, feeling
insufficiently prepared. About Nietzsche then was said everywhere, and
the majority viewed it with hostility, especially "competent"
students-philosophers. From this I concluded that he dislikes in
academic philosophical circles. The highest authority was considered there,
of course, Jacob Burckhardt, whose criticisms of Nietzsche were passed
from mouth to mouth. Moreover, the University had people personally Navassa Nietzsche,
which could tell a lot about him unflattering. In most of them
Nietzsche did not read, but spoke mostly about his weaknesses and eccentricities: his
the desire to portray "the dandy", his manner of playing piano, his
stylistic absurdities - about all the oddities that caused
the annoyance of respectable inhabitants of Basel. This, of course, could not
to get me to abandon reading Nietzsche, rather, was only
boost, fueling interest in him and, generating a secret fear that I might be
maybe, like him, at least in terms of my "secrets" and
rejection. Maybe - who knows? he had secret thoughts, feelings
and the insights that he so carelessly revealed to people. And they didn't understand it.
Obviously, he was the exception to the rule, or at least was considered as such,
as a kind of lusus naturae (a freak of nature. - lat.), I did not want
to be under any circumstances. I was afraid and about me how about
Nietzsche, "it is the same...". Of course, si parva licet componere magnis (if
allowed to compare great with small. - lat.)- he was a Professor, wrote
a lot of books and reached unattainable heights. He was born in a great country -
Germany, while I was only the Swiss and the son of a village
priest. He expressed himself in elegant Hochdeutsch, knew Latin and
Greek, and maybe French, Italian and Spanish, while
the only language in which you confidently said I was
Waggis-Baseldeutsch. He, with all this magnificence, could afford
to be eccentric. But I couldn't afford to learn its eccentricities
.
 Fears  such didn't stop me. Tormented insurmountable
curiosity, and I finally decided. "Untimely thoughts" were first
the book fell into my hands. Fascinated, I soon read "Thus spoke
Zarathustra". Like Goethe's "Faust", this book became a real event in
my life, Zarathustra was Nietzsche's Faust, and my "number 2" has now become very
like Zarathustra, although the difference between them was like between Krotova
Nora and Mont Blanc. In the Zarathustra was certainly something painful. And was
whether painful my "number 2"? The thought of it filled me with horror, andI
for a long time refused to acknowledge it; but she appeared again and again in
the most unexpected moments, and each time I felt physical fear. It
got me thinking seriously. Nietzsche discovered your "number 2" quite
later, when he was thirty, whereas I was familiar with since childhood.
Nietzsche said it is naive and careless about what to say should not, said
as if this was quite a common thing. I very soon noticed that
such talk is nothing good do not result. How could he, with all his
genius as a young man, but Professor, - as he could
to come to Basel, not assuming it here waiting for? As a person
brilliant, he had to feel how alien this
city. I saw some of the painful misunderstandings that Nietzsche blithely
and nothing suspecting, has allowed "room 2" to speak with the world about
such things neither knew nor wanted to know. Nietzsche, as I thought, moved
children hope to find people able to share his ecstasies and take it
a "revaluation of values". But he found only the educated Philistines and
turned out to be tragicomic in alone, as anyone who does not understand himself
and who discovers his secret before dark, miserable crowd. Hence his
bombastic, enthusiastic language, the piling up of metaphors and comparisons - in short,
all he vainly sought to draw the attention of the world to become intelligible to
him.