Before I really started studying philosophy, I was still interested in philosophy, but as a novice. During this time, Nietzsche was my favorite philosopher and I read several of his books. I also read a lot of literature, and Nietzsche figured in a lot of the literary texts I enjoyed.<p>Now that I've read a lot more philosophical texts, I realize that both of the big philosophical camps--Anglo-American Analytic Philosophy and Continental Philosophy--rarely mention Nietzsche. Nietzsche seems to be the philosopher that non-philosophers turn to and often cite.
Nietzsche is referenced constantly:<p><a href="https://philpapers.org/asearch.pl?strict=1&searchStr=Nietzsche,%20Friedrich%20Wilhelm&filterMode=authors" rel="nofollow">https://philpapers.org/asearch.pl?strict=1&searchStr=Nietzsc...</a><p>Also, some pretty substantial continental philosophers wrote about Nietzsche. Heidegger wrote a ton about him. Foucault used his genealogical method. Deleuze, Derrida, etc. all wrote a lot.<p>Heck, half of the big Continental names wrote books on Nietzsche:<p><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nietzsche_and_Philosophy" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nietzsche_and_Philosophy</a><p><a href="https://sunypress.edu/Books/O/On-Nietzsche" rel="nofollow">https://sunypress.edu/Books/O/On-Nietzsche</a><p><a href="https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/S/bo27619914.html" rel="nofollow">https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/S/bo276199...</a><p>Analytic philosophy indeed didn't write much about Nietzsche, but I don't know why they would have. Very different subject matter and style.
I had a similar experience, but I think a lot of other modern philosophy is really pedantic and builds upon a thousand years of writings. So its very hard to follow without proper academic study or understanding what its in response to.<p>Nietzsche has paragraphs that could be studied and independently thought about without even reading the rest of the book/chapter. You can crack open beyond good and evil and just start reading a random page.<p>I still would argue his thought is far more groundbreaking than any contemporaries
But Nietzsche has more impact on minds of people. In 100 years I am sure Bronze Age Pervert will be seen as more influential than some random philosophist from random university.
I mean, when I studied continental philosophy in the 90s, there was plenty of Nietzsche discussed. But I'd say, perhaps, more in his influence elsewhere than as primary text. E.g. I did a term studying Heidegger and Nietzsche played into that.<p>I do think that maybe more recent work in continental schools (perhaps rightly) de-emphasize him as part of a larger turn away from the "postmodern" more broadly vs what was trendy in the 90s.