The book begins with a satire on religion, but with the central character names Zarathustra as an ode to Nietzsche’s favourite religious character - Zoaraster. Nietzsche was hugely inspired by the character and had drafter the idea of the book in 1880s while walking through a forest. After connecting the theme, and his inspiration from Zoaraster, I believe/interpret that the author wanted to write the book as a hope for men to uplift themselves like Zoaraster does in the Persian mythology. The latter was a philosopher who taught people how to do things, and become better. He did not ask for renumeration in return or promise things of the unknown world. While the messiah of the later history have continuously grown to ask for compensation and renumeration of all sorts. Although the writing style is a little archaic and different to thoroughly enjoy the reading, but the message is really strong from the book. One has to appreciate the subtlety in the satire of the book on humankind, religion, and society where we deem ourselves to be strong, unique and powerful, but instead are weak, similar and fragile. While, we fall head over heels over something strange and new, we at the same time develop a dislike for the same thing, but keep it hidden. Its only in the last pages of the book when he shows the hatred amongst his animal friends towards him. Is this his manner of recreating ‘The Last Supper’ and a complete representation of humans full of disrespect for others? Only he shall know it. Its widely believed that Nietzsche did not want his book published and his sister only published it because of her marriage to an S S officer who could use the concept of a Ubermenschen to promote the Aryan racial theory. As interesting it is to believe, this, I find this a bit of coincidental because if the book represents any insight into the mind of Nietzsche, it shows that he would have liked the book to be published. This is mainly to overcome his psychological inferiority amongst his peers which he developed post his fall from the horse. However, he would have hated how the book was used for propaganda by the Nazis because in my understanding of the text, its highly unlikely he wanted to support a racial theory. I can only develop my theory by reading more of Nietzsche, and I feel that I will find him easier and interesting to read. He is easier to understand and interpret unlike Kant - who is impossible and needs 1 hour per page, but someday I will read Kant again. Nietzsche ‘Beyond Good and Evil’ could be a good insight into his mind, and any correlation or similarity/difference of thoughts with ‘Thus, spoke Zarathustra’ will be able to further my theory or eliminate my theory. In the end I think it was a book worth reading, though it has a difficult prose and literary style to read.