N&G
I enjoyed reading Narcissus & Goldmund about a couple of months ago, but didn't have much to say initially. So I was thinking about it recently, and realized that its intrinsic logic doesn't really hold up to scratch.
Basically, it's less compelling than it wants to be.
My qualm: Hesse embodies the traits of a thinker and feeler in Narcissus and Goldmund, respectively. They show the conflict between science and art. Narcissus is austere and analytical, while Goldmund is worldly and sensual. Said characteristics aren't so black & white in real life, but Narcissus and Goldmund are archetypes since his story is a parable. I don't have any quibbles against this in itself.
What does bother me is how Hesse plays out his ideology in the book.
Narcissus's position of intellect is stagnant; it never changes or evolves, partly because Hesse ignores him for much of the book. Worse, Narcissus's role is never challenged. In contrast, Goldmund is forced to go on a journey to 'discover himself'*, which takes up the middle chunk of the book.
This reflects that Hesse (subconsciously or not) believes in the worth of the thinker already, whereas his belief in that of the feeler is ambiguous at best. It's not very balanced, and ends up coming across as Hesse's attempt to prove to himself that the the latter position does hold merit.
The writing style is pretty readable, despite the translation being sandpaper-rough in places.
Thus I liked it, but can't give the book a wholehearted recommendation. The beginning and ending chapters made up the brunt of my interest, which bogged down in the middle. There's only so much you can take of the same scenario repeated x times over, and the book was strongest when dealing with Narcissus and Goldmund's interaction (yeah, they're slashy, for the curious). From just reading this, I'd be dissuaded from reading any more Hermann Hesse, but I'll stick with him cos Demian sounds loads more complex and interesting. I think Narcissus & Goldmund is more instantly appealing, though.
Also: if Goldmund were a Victorian-era dandy, he'd be Dorian Gray. Carelessly amoral blond prettyboys, both.
*Read: sex, murder and mayhem galore, in subdued classical literary style -- 'cept it isn't nearly as interesting as that sounds.
Obligatory Christmas post to come!
Basically, it's less compelling than it wants to be.
My qualm: Hesse embodies the traits of a thinker and feeler in Narcissus and Goldmund, respectively. They show the conflict between science and art. Narcissus is austere and analytical, while Goldmund is worldly and sensual. Said characteristics aren't so black & white in real life, but Narcissus and Goldmund are archetypes since his story is a parable. I don't have any quibbles against this in itself.
What does bother me is how Hesse plays out his ideology in the book.
Narcissus's position of intellect is stagnant; it never changes or evolves, partly because Hesse ignores him for much of the book. Worse, Narcissus's role is never challenged. In contrast, Goldmund is forced to go on a journey to 'discover himself'*, which takes up the middle chunk of the book.
This reflects that Hesse (subconsciously or not) believes in the worth of the thinker already, whereas his belief in that of the feeler is ambiguous at best. It's not very balanced, and ends up coming across as Hesse's attempt to prove to himself that the the latter position does hold merit.
The writing style is pretty readable, despite the translation being sandpaper-rough in places.
Thus I liked it, but can't give the book a wholehearted recommendation. The beginning and ending chapters made up the brunt of my interest, which bogged down in the middle. There's only so much you can take of the same scenario repeated x times over, and the book was strongest when dealing with Narcissus and Goldmund's interaction (yeah, they're slashy, for the curious). From just reading this, I'd be dissuaded from reading any more Hermann Hesse, but I'll stick with him cos Demian sounds loads more complex and interesting. I think Narcissus & Goldmund is more instantly appealing, though.
Also: if Goldmund were a Victorian-era dandy, he'd be Dorian Gray. Carelessly amoral blond prettyboys, both.
*Read: sex, murder and mayhem galore, in subdued classical literary style -- 'cept it isn't nearly as interesting as that sounds.
Obligatory Christmas post to come!