[dogsbestfriend06]

Interesting topic, but as a Nietzsche reader, I think you are missing some points.

[ QUOTE ]
...we see that despite his defiance of conventional morality, Nietzsche was involved whole-heartedly in a conventional infatuation.

[/ QUOTE ]

This doesn't make sense to me. Morality and passion are not one in the same, in fact may be at opposite ends of a spectrum. Nietzsche always embraced the Dionysian spirit of passion, which is perfectly in line with "infatuation" as well as perfectly opposed to conventional morality.

[ QUOTE ]
By understanding his relationship with Salomé and its consequences, a more complete understanding of his philosophy emerges.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not sure about this conclusion. A heightened sense of awareness can come from suffering, but investigating the source of suffering may have little to do with the output of that awareness. I could be wrong, and I think correlation would be strongest in those with less aptitude for critical thought. But N was quite disposed to critical thought, so I don't think that studying this relationship would provide too much insight into his philosophy. Sadness is the muse of many a writer, but the source of sadness may be a catalyst for the desire for introspection, but not a driver in the result of that introspection. Of course, you seem to have studied this in far more depth than me... that's just my initial reaction to your conclusion without seeing your paper.

Maybe I'm overly judgemental as I think teaching philosophy in an academic manner is fraught with examples where people try to find too much meaning in things to justify their course of study. However, by treating philosophers and their works as the writings of fallible men with external influences, your work seems on the right track.