| Title | : | Narcissus and Goldmund |
| Author | : | |
| Rating | : | |
| ISBN | : | 0374506841 |
| ISBN-10 | : | 9780374506841 |
| Language | : | English |
| Format Type | : | Paperback |
| Number of Pages | : | 320 |
| Publication | : | First published January 1, 1930 |
| Awards | : | Schlegel-Tieck Prize Leila Vennewitz (1994) |
Narcissus and Goldmund Reviews
-
At the time of reading, this was my favorite Hesse book and, indeed, it is probably his quintessential novel, the one to recommend for anyone wanting to check him out. I have given away copies of it for this purpose to several persons over the years.
Contrary to the description in Wikipedia, I read the novel from the perspective of Goldmund being lost and then found. Seduced by the snares of the world, he leaves the peace of the monastic life for a life of trial and error, ultimately, as an old man, returning to where he began. Since in his case experience led to wisdom, Goldmund represented to me the via positiva, the path to enlightenment which leads through lovingly appropriated experience, while Narcissus, remaining behind in the monastery, represented the via negativa, the path to enlightenment obtained by critical thinking and contemplative withdrawal. This, the essential identity behind two ostensibly very different paths along life's way, reminded me also of the two main schools of Buddhism, the big and little boats, Mahayana and Hinayana Buddhism. One is also reminded of the same distinction when the lives of Christian saints as different at Francis of Assisi and Simeon of the Desert are sympathetically compared. There is truth to it.
This is not to say that the reference made by the Wikipedia writer to Nietzsche's Apollonian and Dionysian is incorrect. Given the intellectual influences obtaining in Hesse's circles and the nature of his missionary family it is likely that both were considered. My own reading was influenced by having studied mysticism by this time and not yet having read Nietzsche's The Birth of Tragedy.
What I really like about Hermann Hesse, here and elsewhere, is that he really cared, cared about people, cared about culture and cared about the natural world. Most everything he wrote, from his novels and short stories to his political essays, attempts to be constructive, to share something of what he had learned of importance with others. He wrote to the better side of our natures, both emotional and intellectual. I am so glad that young people are still reading him despite the many years which have passed since his last great work, The Glass Bead Game, in 1943. -
What an ironical prig this Narcissus guy is!
Narcissus and Goldmund, as I look back on it now in my old age - far from my youthful love for it - is one of Hesse’s near-misses. Close, but no cigar, as they used to say at the Fair. This novel could have been perfect.
But no - it misses the boat. At least to someone like me who’s a tiny bit older and wiser...
Why?
To find that out, let’s go back to the medieval era, in which this book is set...
There once was an ‘almost-Narcissus’ back then. His name was Desiderius Erasmus.
A Catholic and Monkish gentleman (and a scholar) of the world, he acted as a facilitator for the catholicism of Catholicism, and as a friend of Church nobility and peacemaker. He purportedly was a friend of poor ordinary souls. It’s true, I think, that he envied their spontaneous ease!
He wanted, you see, to silence his own bête noire: Martin Luther, an almost-Goldmund.
You see, Luther was an semi-innocent, like Goldmund - who was impulsive and passionate, like his real-life archetype. And both Luther and his fictional doppelgänger Goldmund were deeply conflicted. And Luther, like Goldmund, was ready to suffer eternal torment, if needs be, for following his own star. Erasmus? Never!
And spontaneous! And Erasmus was not.
For if in conflicted souls spontaneity is dammed up in the heart the result is spiritual entropy!
There, though, the near-similarity ends... and while Goldmund‘s outlet was art, Luther’s was the defence of simple faith and warm married love.
If Erasmus more nearly approximates to the coolly rational but envious Narcissus...
Hesse is ALSO a Narcissus, like Erasmus.
A wannabe free spirit!
A sophisticated pan-European man of the world, he resented and perhaps envied passionate, mystical artists - like Rainer Maria Rilke - and his own creation, Goldmund.
These are men who live by the free spiritual self-replenishment of pure inspiration!
Rilke, like Luther and Goldmund, could do no wrong in the eyes of his admirers. He could also do as he liked. And did it, though, always within the bounds of decency. Like the other two, he was also conflicted:
As we see in his great, final Duino Elegies.
And that masterpiece shows, like Luther and Goldmund before him, he could be mystical in a way few other men were.
Few men, and that includes Hesse.
Hesse was partly a lie to the world, for he, like so many, was so precisely and tormentedly that to himself.
He wasn’t an ingenuous, mystical guy like Rilke. And perhaps his outré habits, like those of the protagonist of Demian, bound his soul to self-contradiction. And the complications of Narcissus or Erasmus.
But a he was a true barometer of his times.
And that is the reason this near-masterpiece is close, but no cigar... he TRIES too hard for perfection.
Perfection wasn’t to Rilke like an endless Glass Bead Game - but, rather, like being out on the open water of imagination and feeling the Pneuma of Inspiration catch your sails.
It must, you see, come from the heart - but it can’t, with Hesse.
Perhaps Hesse’s Heart was just too constricted and dark a place.
Because it was formed of his endless anxieties and boredom, which NEVER gave him Answers of the Spirit but only Excuses for possible Escape - and further intellectual exploration.
Like Erasmus - while Luther’s Faith was a constant Breeze from a sincere Heart. How frustrating!
And the heart has its reasons, of which the brain knows nothing!
That, at least, is one old guy’s two cents worth.
Even though, as a kid, I LOVED it, lulled by its twin themes of rebellion and creativity.
But I hadn’t then seen the Source of those two Inspiring emotions...
In the very Life Force that moves the Universe -
But I do now. -
Narziß und Goldmund = Death and the Lover = Narcissus and Goldmund, Hermann Hesse
Narcissus and Goldmund is a novel written by the German–Swiss author Hermann Hesse which was first published in 1930. At its publication, Narcissus and Goldmund was considered Hesse's literary triumph; chronologically, it follows Steppenwolf.
Narcissus and Goldmund is the story of a young man, Goldmund, who wanders aimlessly throughout Medieval Germany after leaving a Catholic monastery school in search of what could be described as "the meaning of life," or rather, the meaning of his life.
عنوانهای چاپ شده در ایران: «نارتسیس و گلدموند»؛ «نرگس و زرين دهان»؛ نویسنده: هرمان هسه؛ تاریخ نخستین خوانش: ماه آگوست سال2008میلادی
عنوان: نرگس و زرین دهان؛ نویسنده: هرمان هسه؛ مترجم: سروش حبیبی؛ تهران، رز، 1350، در 425ص؛ چاپ دوم 1361؛ موضوع داستانهای نویسندگان آلمانی تبار سوئیس - سده 20م
عنوان: نارتسیس و گلدموند؛ نویسنده: هرمان هسه؛ مترجم: سروش حبیبی؛ تهران، نشر چشمه، پاییز 1384، چاپ دوم پاییز 1385؛ در 368ص؛ شابک9643622606؛
عنوان: نرگس و زرین دهان؛ نویسنده: هرمان هسه؛ مترجم: فرزانه معزی؛ مشهد، سخن گستر، 1385، در 400ص؛ شابک ایکس-964477132؛
عنوان: نارسیس اثر هرمان هسه ؛ مترجم وحید منوچهریواحد؛ تهران: جامی، 1393؛ در 272ص؛ شابک9786001760976؛
عنوان: نارسیس و گلدموند؛ نوشته هرمان هسه؛ مترجم محمد بقائی (ماکان)؛تهران انتشارات تهران، آلما، 1392؛ در 462ص؛ شابک9789642911578؛ چاپ دوم 1397؛
عنوان: نارسیس و گلدموند؛ تالیف هرمان هسه؛ مترجم ساره خسروی؛ تهران، حباب، 1397؛ در 280ص؛ شابک9786226315210؛
عنوان: نارسیس و گلدموند؛ نویسنده هرمان هسه؛ مترجم مهدی لطیفی؛ تهران: انتشارات منوچهری، 1397؛ در 295ص؛ شابک9786005994421؛
با عنوانهای: «نرگس و زرين دهان»، و «نارتسیس و گلدموند»، مترجم: سروش حبیبی، انتشارات رز و چشمه، و با عنوان: «نرگس و زرين دهان»، ترجمه: فرزانه معزی، انتشارات سخن گستر در مشهد؛
گلدموند (زرین دهان) بیابانگردی، با روحی لطیف، و دیدی هنرمندانه، به خوانشگر معرفی شده، و نارتسیس (نرگس) عابدی والامقام، که گناهی مرتکب نشده، و عمرش را به عبادت گذرانده است؛ همین چند روز پیشتر نیز باز هم ترجمه ی جناب «سروش حبیبی» را خواندم، شاهکار «هرمان هسه» است
نقل از متن کتاب: (زرین دهان: فکر میکنم که یک گلبرگ گل یاس کوچک که میلولد، بسیار بیشتر از تمام کتابهای کتابخانه، حرف دارد؛ با حروف و کلمات، نمیتوان تمام حقیقت را بیان کرد؛ «نارتسیس»: برای فراگیری علوم، این چند حرف کافی نیست؛ روح جهان، جسم را دوست دارد، کالبد را دوست دارد، تا در آن از روح خود بدمد؛ او میخواهد که ما آیات الهی را بشناسیم؛ او بودن را دوست دارد، نه شدن را؛ حقیقت را دوست دارد، نه ممکن را؛ او تحمل نمیکند، که حرف دلها، به شکل مار، یا پرنده ای درآیند؛ در طبیعت، روح نمیتواند ماده باشد، بلکه ضد آن، و در تضاد با آن است.)؛ پایان نقل
نقل دیگر: (گاه درِ اتاقِ «گلدموند» را، که پیکره ی «مریم» در آن قرار داشت، باز میکرد، و با احتیاط، روپوش از صورتش عقب میزد، و در برابرش میماند؛ از منشأ آن، چیزی نمیدانست؛ «گلدموند» هرگز داستان «لیدیا» را، برای او نقل نکرده بود؛ اما «نارتسیس»، همه چیز را حس میکرد؛ میدانست که اندیشه ی اندام آن دوشیزه، مدتی دراز در دل دوستش، جایی داشته است؛ شاید «گلدموند» او را فریفته بود، یا چه بسا با او بی وفایی کرده، و تنهایش گذاشته بود؛ اما او را در جان خود همراه داشته، و وفادارانه تر از هر شوهری، از یاد او حراست کرده، و سرانجام شاید پس از سالهای بسیار، که طی آنها او را هرگز ندیده، این صورت دل انگیز را، از او پرداخته، و چهره و اطوار، و دستهایش، تمام مهر و ستایش اشتیاق، و دلدلدگی را متجلی ساخته بود)؛ پایان نقل
تاریخ بهنگام رسانی 27/09/1399هجری خورشیدی؛ 06/07/1400هجری خورشیدی؛ ا. شربیانی -
- افضل الروايات، بالنسبة لي، تلك التي تذكرني بروايات قريبة الى قلبي او عقلي، فكيف اذا كانت البداية قد وضعتني في جو "اسم الوردة"، والتفاصيل ذكرتني بـ "اله المتاهة"، والديالكتيك اعادني الى "المعلم ومرغريتا"، وتعدد السبل احالني الى ابن طفيل ورائعته "حي بن يقظان"!هذا العبق اللذيذ مع السرد البسيط والإستطرادات الفلسفية المبنية على ثنائيات عديدة (سأفصلها لاحقاً) جعل من هذه الرواية احدى الكلاسيكيات الرائعة التي ستبقى في ذاكرتي لوقت طويل جداً!
- تبدأ القصة مع وصول غولدموند الى الدير حيث نرسيس، نرسيس فرّيسي (يمتلك الفراسة) فيسبر اعماق غولدموند وينصحه بإيجاد مسلكه فلا هو راهب وليس بإستطاعته ان يكون مفكراً، يغادر غولدموند وتبدأ مغامراته التي لا تنتهي، ينغمس بمتع الحياة ويتخلل مساره الكثير من الحب والجنس والتشرد والسير والموت والفن والنحت والرسم كما يتخلله استنتاجات من كل تجربة حياتية مرّ بها واستخلاص نتائج وتفسيرات... يلتقي الصديقان بعد سنوات فينقذه نرسيس من الموت ويعود به الى الدير حيث يعصر غولدموند خلاص تجربته في بعض المنحوتات ويستقر اخيراً مطمئناً على فراش الموت تاركاً نرسيس ليبدأ رحلته الخاصة من دون اي تفاصيل من الكاتب.
- القصة بظاهرها قصة صديقان تجمعهما المحبة ورغم ان القسم الأكبر كان عن غولدموند الا ان نرسيس كان حاضراً بين سطور الرواية بمجملها. هذان الصديقان متناقضان احدهما يمثّل العقل (نرسيس) او الفكر والجانب الأبوي والآخر (غولدموند) يمثّل العاطفة والجانب الأمومي (او الانثوي)، نرسيس يمثّل المجردات الباردة وغولدموند يمثّل المحسوسات الدافئة، نرسيس يمثّل الفكرة وغولدموند يمثّل الصورة!
- القصة بباطنها تحمل العديد من التفسيرات والطبقات، خصوصاً مع الفلسفة الدائرية التي اعتمدها "هيسه" مع غولدموند حيث بدأ من الدير ولفّ الأرجاء وعاد الى نقطة الإنطلاق بإرتكازه على محور "الأم" والعاطفة. كما ان الإعتماد على الديالكتيك والثنائيات وفلسفات نيتشة من جهة وتصوف إيكهارت من جهة ��انية قد اغنى الرواية واعطى لها ابعاداً جديدة وتمخّض عنها اسئلة كثيرة.
- نرسيس قد يمثّل الفكر المجرّد لكنه بذات الوقت قد يمثّل التديّن السلبي حيث لا تجارب حياتية بل انعزال وابتعاد وانعتاق، على النقيض لغولدموند الذي قد يمثّل الطريق الى التديّن الإيجابي او "الشك في اتجاه اليقين" حيث خاض غمار كل التجارب الممكنة من اجل الحصول على الخلاص! لكن بذات الوقت فإن نرسيس يمثّل الفكر المتنور الصافي الذي يترك الناس تعبر عن ذاتها بدون فرض واكراه وتخويف وابتزاز ( ص330"لا تحاول ان تقلد الزهاد والمتفقهين، بل كن ذاتك، واعمل على تحقيق ذاتك") كما انه لا يتصرّف كمن يمتلك الحقيقة المطلقة بل ان تواضعه يسمح له بقول الآتي (ص344:"كم من دروب تؤدي بنا الى المعرفة، وان الدراسة ليست الدرب الوحيد المؤدي اليها. ولعلها ليست ألأفضل في ذلك")
- اما على الصعيد الشخصي فقد رأيت نرسيس وغولدموند يشكلان جزئين لإنسان واحد، العقل والعاطفة، وهذان الجزءان لا يتوقفان عن العبث داخل كل انسان فأما ان يجذبه نرسيس اليه واما ان يسحبه غولدموند بإتجاهه، لكن هذه العملية ليست بعملية ارتقاء او انحدار بل مسلكين اثنين يؤديان الى النتيجة عينها، المعرفة والخلاص. ولا شكّ بأننا نحتاج لقليل من نرسيس وقليل من غوادموند في هذه الرحلة القصيرة على الأرض.
- ختاما، هل كان غولدموند هو هيرمان هيسة الذي ترك الدير في صباه؟! ام كان نرسيس بما يمتلكه هيسة من نرجسية ام انهما اقنومان لهيسة واحد!؟
- الترجمة كانت جيدة جداً، لدي تعليق بسيط على استعمال كلمة "الحب" فقد اتت بمعنى: المحبة، والعشق، والشهوة، والوله وكان من الأفضل استعمال المفردات المتاحة (والكثيرة) للغة العربية الا اذا كان هيسة قد عبّر بمفردة واحدة (الحب) عن كل هذه الأحاسيس! -
Narcissus and Goldmund tells the narrative of two men (although Goldmund gets a bigger chunk of the story), each seeking a higher fulfillment in his own way. The novel chronicles the life of an aimless wanderer breaking free, and one strongly binded to faith living in the Mariabronn monastery. The novel is both a journey and an awakening that takes the reader over the course of many decades. Living in a hidden cloister in medieval Germany, Narcissus is a most learned and pious young acolyte pursuing knowledge, and the contemplation of logic, philosophy and theology. When the younger boy Goldmund arrives at the cloister, he recognizes him as his counterpart, his opposite. Reckless, wild and passionate. Narcissus is fascinated with the boy, and takes him under his wing. Goldmund makes other friends, but none becomes as dear to him as Narcissus. A great bond is set in place. But Goldmund comes to realize that his fate does not lie solely with the Church, but with the wider lands. It's his nature to seek pleasure and joy from God’s creation. All bought on after sneaking off to a village and receiving a kiss from a young Gypsy. He feels remorse, but wants more, as his virgin heart aches to pursue this love affair. With this he opens up into his true self, and wishes to leave the confinements of Mariabronn. After Narcissus gives his blessing and releases his friend out into the wide world, the novel truly takes hold.
And so begins Goldmund’s travels as vagrant. Wandering around the country for years he discovers the ways of love, and seduces countless women. He would encounter death and violence, the beauty of art and labor, and the agonizing sadness of loss. He makes friends, but also enemies, and later witnesses the horrors of the ghastly plague. He does not live in the world of the mind, but in the physical world of love, music, art and mortality. After many years apart Goldmund and Narcissus reunite and discuss their differing lives. Narcissus tries to explain to his friend the meaning of his quest, the importance of the life of the flesh, and he begs him to imagine a thought devoid of an accompanying image. But Goldmund fails to understand because he is forever rooted in the rich earth, in life, and cannot cross the barrier into a pure thought, an imagination without objects and images. Each man seems to occupy one side of the other. This is the reason for their strong friendship and understanding of one another, both are somehow incomplete. But together, they become closer to enlightenment, closer to hard clay than to wet sand.
Hesse's poetic and emotive medieval coming-of-age story reads as the quintessential novel on the pains and euphoria of adolescence, forming a deep lifelong friendship, and succumbing to the desires of the opposite sex, of which, after years stuck in a Monastery, it's a case of making up for lost time. Even though there are many layers to this book - fairytale qualities, existentialism, philosophy, love and passion, and religion, it reads surprising easily, a world away from Steppenwolf. Hesse's enriched prose and beautifully ladened descriptions of the landscapes, had a slight resemblance to the writings Knut Hamsun, and for a novel first published in 1930 and set in Medieval Germany it still felt remarkably fresh, as it simply deals with the universal problems of growing up and finding one's true worth in the world. Regardless of place and time. Narcissus and Goldmund is ultimately a raging battle between the body and mind (and the plague!), a pandora’s box of contemplation, and a novel that lingered strongly well after it's closing pages. -
“Narciso y Goldmundo” es una novela filosófica con aires de cuento tradicional en el que se narra el viaje que emprende un joven hermoso y encantador llamado Goldmundo, que terminará siendo un camino al centro de sí mismo. Un viaje que inicia aconsejado por su maestro, Narciso, poseedor del don de intuir el fondo esencial de cada persona, y espoleado por un anhelo, una especie de culpa innata que le desasosiega y le empuja a buscar algo que no se sabe qué es ni dónde lo podrá encontrar.“Mientras Narciso era sombrío y magro, Goldmundo aparecía radiante y lleno de vida, Y así como el primero parecía ser un espirito reflexivo y analítico, el segundo daba la impresión de ser un soñador y tener alma infantil…
Bien pronto descubriría Goldmundo que su anhelo pudiera estar íntimamente relacionado con la muerte. Aprender a enfrentarse a ella será el objetivo de su vida errante.“Sí, mi estimadísimo amigo, el mundo está lleno de muerte, lleno de muerte; sobre cada vallado aparece sentada la pálida dama, escondida detrás de cada árbol, y de nada vale que edifiquéis muros y dormitorios y capillas e iglesias, porque atisba por la ventana, y se ríe, y os conoce a todos, y en medio de la noche la oís reírse ante vuestras ventanas y pronunciar vuestros nombres. ¡Seguid cantando vuestros salmos y encendiendo hermosos cirios en los altares y rezando vuestras vísperas y maitines y coleccionando plantas en el laboratorio y libros en la biblioteca!... Todo se irá, todo se irá al diablo, y en el árbol aguardan los cuervos, los negros frailucos.” …
Vivir el presente, disfrutar de lo que la vida le regala en cada momento, soportar el sol, la lluvia, la sequía, la nieve con la misma dulzura y mansedumbre que lo hacen los bosques, deleitarse con todo el placer que le procuran las mujeres, por las que es generosamente adorado, esa fue su primera respuesta.“Podía entregarse a aquella tristeza y a aquel espanto de la transitoriedad con el mismo fervor que al amor, y esa melancolía era también amor, era también carnalidad. Así como el goce erótico, en el instante de su máxima y más dichosa tensión, sabe que inmediatamente después se desvanecerá y morirá de nuevo, así también la íntima soledad y la melancolía sabían que serían tragados súbitamente por el deseo, por una nueva entrega a la faceta luminosa de la vida.” …
Y vio que todo era bueno y necesario, pero también que “lo bello y amado es efímero”, que su búsqueda del placer no terminaba con su desasosiego y, una vez saciado el deseo, volvía a estar en medio del desierto.
¿Podría ser Dios la respuesta? No, Goldmundo no podía confiar en un Dios que, “o bien no existía en absoluto o no podía darle ayuda”, un Dios que había creado un mundo horrible poblado de seres miserables. Un Dios curioso es también aquel en el que cree Narciso, abad de la congregación de la que era alumno Goldmundo, un Dios perfecto, pero creador de un mundo imperfecto, un Dios para el que nuestros actos son pueriles, por lo que quizás valiera tanto una vida de esfuerzo y sacrifico permanente, de renuncia al mundo y a la sensualidad, que la vida de un artista, vagabundo y seductor de mujeres. ¿No era Dios quién nos había creado con “sentidos e instintos, con sangrientas tenebrosidades, con capacidad para pecar, para gozar, para desesperarse?”“… tal vez el llevar una vida como la de Goldmundo no fuera tan sólo más inocente y más humano, sino que también, a la postre, fuera más valiente y más grande abandonarse a la violenta confusión y al torbellino, cometer pecados y cargar con sus amargas consecuencias, en vez de llevar una vida pura apartado del mundo, con las manos limpias, y construirse un hermoso jardín intelectual lleno de armonía y pasearse sin pecado entre sus resguardados macizos.” …
¿La necesidad de crear nace del deseo de asentar algo que dure mas que nosotros? ¿Podría ser el arte una respuesta al temor a la muerte? Pero el arte necesita una dedicación absoluta, absorbente, incompatible con la libertad de las grandes aventuras.“… o bien uno se defendía y se encerraba en un taller y trataba de levantar un monumento a la vida huidiza, y entonces había que renunciar a la vida y uno era un mero instrumento, y aunque estaba al servicio de lo perduradero, se resecaba y perdía la libertad, la plenitud y el gozo de la vida… ¡Ah, y, sin embargo, la vida sólo tenía un sentido si cabía alcanzar ambas cosas a la vez, si no se veía escindida por esa tajante oposición! ¡Crear sin tener que pagar por ello el precio del vivir! ¡Vivir sin tener que renunciar a la nobleza del crear! ¿Por ventura no era posible?” …
Quizá la única solución es ver a la muerte más como una aliada que como una enemiga. En definitiva, “qué sería el placer de los sentidos si no estuviera tras ellos la muerte”. Cuando, pasados los años, ya no se siente esa necesidad del placer, esa necesidad de perpetuarse en la creación, cuando las llamas se han apagado, solo queda esperar que “la muerte será una inmensa dicha, una dicha tan grande como el primer abrazo amoroso… en lugar de la muerte con su guadaña, será mi madre la que me llevará de nuevo hacia sí, reintegrándome al no ser y a la inocencia.”“…la terrible canción de la muerte sonaba en él de muy distinta manera, no áspera y macabra, sino más bien dulce y seductora, hogareña, maternal. Allí donde la muerte metía su mano en la vida no sonaba tan sólo de aquel modo estridente y guerrero sino también de una manera profunda y amorosa, otoñal y harta, y en la proximidad del morir, la lamparilla de la vida ardía con más claro e íntimo resplandor. Si para otros la muerte era un guerrero, un juez o un verdugo o un padre severo, para él era, también, una madre y una amante, su llamada un reclamo de amor, un estremecimiento de amor su contacto.” …
Me gustó su tono, su planteamiento, muchas de sus reflexiones, las preguntas... la respuesta que aporta puede que le sirviera al autor, aunque lo dudo mucho. -
... Artist, Smartist
“We fear death, we shudder at life's instability, we grieve to see the flowers wilt..., and the leaves fall, and in our hearts we know that we, too, are transitory and will soon disappear. When artists create pictures and thinkers search for laws and formulate thoughts, it is in order to salvage something from the great dance of death, to make something last longer than we do.”
Probably the most vivid contrast I've read between, on one hand, the beauty of the skin, visual art and sensual pleasures, and, on the other, the splendors of the spirit, stability, science and logic.
Herman Hesse's brilliant philosophical novel (1930) involves two friends in medieval Germany. Largely metaphorical, this has the feel of a cautionary fairy tale with no true compass as to geography or time. The story begins when Goldmund, a student, and Narcissus, a teacher only a few years older, become friends at a cloister school. At first, Goldmund earnestly focuses on his studies, but then a few fellow students invite him to go off campus, where he's seduced by a young Gypsy girl. From that day forward, his mind never wanders far from thoughts of women, their sheer beauty and the pleasures of the senses.
He leaves and on his journeys he has numerous affairs with women of all ages, statuses and sizes (similar to Wilt Chamberlain in legion and legend). All women find him irresistible. Yes, the novel is sexist. Goldmund falls for the first young lady to say no, loses her to the serpent of lust for her younger, prettier sister, and then travels far and wide. He settles to become a sculptor for several years, able to brilliantly capture the beauty he has seen. He becomes restless, continues his travels and runs into the unmitigated ugliness of the Black Death. I'll add no more so I don't spoil the story, except to say that when both Goldmund and Narcissus, now an abbot, are much older, they visit and converse at length with each other.
This is an excellent classic. -
#bibliotecaafectivă
Narziß und Goldmund: L-am iubit dintotdeauna, deși, poate, nu e cel mai bun roman al lui Hesse. Asta nu mai contează după atîtea recitiri. E un roman istoric, acțiunea lui se petrece într-un Ev Mediu atemporal. Poate fi privit și ca Bildungsroman. Dar, înainte de orice, e o meditație asupra diferenței dintre două moduri de viață.
Narcis alege o viață controlată de intelect, de asceză și contemplație. Gură-de-Aur alege o viață dominată de simțuri, de voluptate. Pentru Narcis, a trăi înseamnă a gîndi. Pentru Gură-de-Aur, a trăi înseamnă a simți. Este greu de spus, la sfîrșitul cărții, care dintre cei doi prieteni a făcut alegerea corectă (dacă există o astfel de alegere). Cei mai mulți cititori îl preferă pe Goldmund, eu îl prefer pe Narziss. Dar o viață controlată de intelect nu se poate povesti, nu are nimic spectaculos, e ternă și ordonată, evenimentele ei țin îndeosebi de ordinul gîndirii. Prin urmare, Hermann Hesse va consemna povestea lui Gură-de-Aur. Mai bine de jumătate din carte îi este dedicată.
La îndemnul lui Narcis, Gură-de-Aur părăsește mănăstirea din Mariabronn. Este convins „că o petală de floare sau (și) un viermișor de pe drum grăiesc și cuprind mai mult decît toate cărțile unei biblioteci” (p.59). Fermecătorul tînăr va „alege să trăiască”.
Ani după ani, Goldmund duce o viață de vagabond. Nu stă niciodată prea mult în același loc. Doarme și mănîncă pe unde apucă. Iubește la întîmplare cîteva femei (Lise, Lydia, Julie, Lene, Lisbeth, Rebekka, Marie, Agnes). Ucide ca să nu fie ucis. Înțelege brusc că totul e deșertăciune, că nimic nu durează, că moartea strivește orice dorință. Întrevede o singură ieșire din impas: plăcerea erotică. Numai că nici plăcerea nu durează. Și ea e trecătoare. Ajunge într-o biserică și găsește acolo o statuie a Maicii domnului. E cuprins de extaz. Abia acum are revelația salvatoare: „arta e înfrîngerea vremelniciei” (p.247).
Merge, așadar, la meșterul Niklaus și-i cere să-l învețe arta sculpturii. Nu este primit cu bunăvoință, rămîne, totuși. După o vreme, ucenicul își egalează maestrul. Nu mai are rost să-și piardă timpul rătăcind și trăind de pe o zi pe alta. E vremea să se întoarcă acasă. Din păcate, întoarcerea nu mai este posibilă: ținutul e bîntuit de ciumă, va sfida încă o dată moartea. O întîlnește pe Rebekka și-i spune:„Tu nu vezi că peste tot e moarte, că în toate casele și orașele se moare și totu-i plin de jale? Chiar și furia proștilor care l-au ars pe tatăl tău [tatăl Rebekkăi era evreu]... vine din prea multă suferință. Uite, curînd ne ia și pe noi moartea și o să putrezim în cîmp și cu oasele noastre o să joace zaruri cîrtița” (p.207).
P. S. În definitiv, ce înseamnă a trăi? Transcriu încă un pasaj, poate găsim împreună un răspuns: „Era într-adevăr ruşinos să fii astfel dus de nas de viaţă, era de rîs şi de plîns! Ori trăiai, îţi lăsai simţurile să-şi facă de cap..., şi atunci puteai gusta, ce-i drept, voluptăţi supreme, dar nu aveai nici o apărare împotriva efemerului... Ori te apărai, te închideai într-un atelier şi căutai să înalţi vieţii fugare un monument - şi atunci trebuia să renunţi la viaţă, nu mai erai decît o unealtă, stăteai într-adevăr în slujba nepieirii, dar în acelaşi timp te uscai şi-ţi pierdeai libertatea, plenitudinea şi plăcerea vieţii...” (p.228). -
Can I just say that I absolutely love Hermann Hesse. For me his words speak directly to my soul. I have never exclusively followed an author except Hesse. He is absolutely brilliant and his works are so nuanced to the point where they only mean anything to the reader unless they can relate in some profound way. I have now finished all of his major works and I must say "bravo".
All of his books are about the turmoil and duality of the human soul. He speaks my language. My next goal is to learn German so I can read his books again in his native tongue.
Goldmund and Narcissus is about that duality except in the form of two separate characters. One is a thinker the other a feeler, one values rationality and reason and the other values intuition. One lives in the world of abstract ideas and the other in the world of sensuality and the senses. One lives the life of a duty bound priest the other an Artist. Neither is held in higher regard over the other. Both struggle to find the meaning of their nature.
I especially enjoyed the part where Narcissus talks about when someone who is meant to be an artist tries to live the life of a thinker evil ensues. There is danger in trying to force themselves into that false role. He calls the artist-thinker a mystic. Thinkers and artists alike have their place in the world and neither should think they are superior to the other for they are antithesis of each other. -
I enjoyed Hermann Hesse's novel of two medieval German men. The story centers on two friends: Narcissus and Goldmund. The two meet and become friends early in the cloister. Narcissus matures and finds his path in the cloister, takes his vows, and devotes to a monastic life. Goldmund, earthly and taken hold of by the beauty of women, leaves the cloister to undertake an endless search for worldly salvation. Narcissus is the teacher, the pious, and the man of God; Goldmund is the lover, the artist, and the creator of beautiful things.
The author does a great job of showing living dichotomy between the two friends.
I was very moved by the story of venturing out into the world, discovering new people and places, and only to discover yourself. Only in doing so you always end up back where you started. For me it was like when people say "you always go back to the beginning" in some fashion or another.
That was my interpretation of the story: you always come full circle in life.
I truly enjoyed this story and would definitely recommend it. Thanks! -
بعد تجربتي السابقة القريبة مع هيرمان فى روايته داميان و بعد أن كان بدأ الرواية بهدوء وسحر و كان مع التقدم بها تزداد الصعوبة حتى تهت منه فى النهاية تماما . كنت هنا اخطو خطوات بطيئة بحذر ، "مثلما يقولون اقدم رجل واؤخر الاخرى" خوفا مما سيفعله بى هيرمان .
لكن هنا لم تكن بدايته بنفس العذوبة والسهولة لذا كنت غير واثقة انى سأكملها ، فالبداية مع حديث نرسيس كانت تحتاج لاعادة قراءة وتركيز لكن بعد ذلك ومع حديث وحياة غولدمند اصبح اسلوب الرواية اكثر سلاسة وظل يتراوح مابين السهولة والصعوبة مابين احداث الحياة والافكار ، فى مزيج رائع سحرني واعجبني اسلوبه .
نرسيس وغولدمند نموذج لصديقين مختلفين ليس فقط مختلفين بل متناقضين :
كان نرسيس يعتمد على الفكر والعلوم ، يمثل العقل ، يمثل الشخص الذى اختار الانعزال عن العالم ليحفظ نفسه من شروره .فبالنسبة إليه كان كل شئ يدخل في خانة الفكر ، حتى الحب .
اما غولدمند يمثل القلب ، الاحساس والفن ، الطبيعة، الشخص الذى يخوض الحياة بكل جمالها ومساوئها .
لكن هل اختلافهم يجب ان يكون سبب لفراقهم ؟ بالطبع لا ، فهم يكملون بعضهم بعضا ، ويكتمل الإنسان نفسه بالجمع بين العقل والعاطفة فنرسيس وغولدمند ليس فقط صديقان بل هم انفسنا ، الجانب العقلى والعاطفي داخل كل منا .
“ ليس مهمتنا أن نلتقي إلا بقدر ما هي مهمة الشمس والقمر أو البحر واليابسة. نحن الاثنان يا صديقي شمس وقمر بحر ويابسة ، ليس قدرنا ان نغدو شخصا واحدا بل ان يرى كل منا الآخر على ما هو عليه ان يعي ذلك ويجله في الذي أمامه ، أن يجد فيه إنجازه واكتماله "
كم انت محظوظ يا غولدمند بتعارفك على نرسيس ، ان تجد صديق يفهمك ويتفهم احتياجاتك وافكارك حتى حين لم تكن انت شخصيا تعرفها و يتفهم اختلافك عنه ويرشدك لطريقك حتى وإن كان بإرشاده لك سيفقدك لكنه يعرف ان مكانك ليس بجانبه فيرشدك ويساعدك دون أحكام دون محاولات لتغييرك ، يتقبلك ويحبك كما انت رغم اختلافك عنه ، كم انت رائع يانرسيس صديقه ، لم يكون له في الواقع اذا لم يرشده الى معرفة ذاته
غولدمند ساحر النساء من النظرة الاولى يقعون فى غرامه ويسلمون أنفسهم له
أيقظه نرسيس إلى الحياة ،ومنحته النساء حكمتهن . وازال التشرد عنه تورده
هذا حال الدنيا ، الحزن يتلاشي ، وحتي يأسنا يذوب . والألم ، مثل أفراحنا ، يختفي ويغادر ، ويفقد كل اعماقه وقيمته إلى أن يأتي يوم أخيرا وننسى ما وخز قلوبنا لسنوات عديدة قبلها . حتى الألم يتفتت ويفنى
في غالبية الرواية نحن مع غولدمند وهو يدور ويرتحل ويغامر ويحب ويرى الحياة والموت ، يرى حياة التشرد والأمان، يشعر بالشبع والجوع ، الحب والشهوة ، يتراوح ويجرب حياة التشرد وحياة الاستقرار لكن دوما ذكر نرسيس لايختفى كما اننا لاننسى ان نرسيس هو من اخبره ان ليس مقدر له ان يصبح مفكر بل هو شاعر ، فنان لكننا نتعرف ايضا على افكار نرسيس وطريقة حياته .
العقل ام القلب !
التشرد ام الاستقرار !
العزلة ام خوض غمار الحياة !
الفكر والعلوم أم الفن !
نرسيس ام غولدمند ؟!
ايهما تختار ؟
كلاهما اجد اننا مزيج من كل هذا ، وكل منا يتراوح مابين الحالتين لكن يغلب جانب على الآخر فيحدد شخصيته واتجاهاته ، كلاهما جميل ، ولا يوجد يينهم مصيب ومخطئ . المهم ان تكون انت نفسك وان لاتحاول تزييف ما انت عليه ، ان تعمل بما تمليه عليه قناعاتك وقلبك وعقلك .
٢٣ / ٩/ ٢٠٢٠ -
Jeszcze nigdy w żadnej książce nie przeczytałem tak pięknego wyznania miłości! Co za lektura!
-
رواية ستنضج في رأسك مئات الأسئلة..
-
I have reread a few Hesse novels in the past year or so, but for some reason skipped this one, also published as Death and the Lover, in 1930, that many considered to be his literary triumph. Hesse was less respected by the literary establishment than his fellow German countryman Thomas Mann, but he was way more of an international popular sensation, especially in the romantic sixties, when I and many of my friends read him. I was talking to a student who is reading James Joyce’s A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man with me this summer about how Demian reminded me of Portrait, and he suggested I reread Narcissus, especially since he knew I had been reading plague-related novels (Camus’s The Plague, Daniel DeFoe’s A Journal of the Plague Year). Hesse’s novel is set in the middle ages, during the time of The Black Death, which figures in the story in an important way.
There might be a spoiler here and there within my review.
The novel is, like his earlier Demian in many ways, about the struggle between two characters, two souls, two ways of life, that in many ways represented Hesse’s own struggles between the German religion and scholasticism with which he was brought up, and the sensual life, the life of passion, of art. A struggle between a life of the mind/spirit (faith) (represented by the monk Narcissus) and a life of the body (represented by Goldmund). The question might be put this way: Can you live a life of wine, women and song (or to put it another way, live a life of the body, of joy, and passion) and still get into Heaven, and if so, how? The novel is in part an answer to that question. But to be clear, the religion with which he was raised did not have a clear path to Heaven; the paths of the body and soul were separate. You renounce the body t make way for the soul.
Goldmund meets a girl and kisses her, and abruptly leaves monastery school (insert here Tom Waits singing, "I lost my Saint Christopher, now that I've kissed her" from "waltzing Matilda--we know what choice Waits made, to find his soul through his body! Or maybe it was to deliberately lose it?) where he has made deep and lasting connections with his young teacher Narcissus. This kiss might be described as an early epiphany and moment he knows he can't be a celibate monk! He then "wanders across Germany," which is code for the gorgeous Goldmund (also, Gold mouth) living a more physical life, and yes, having sex with women as he travels. Consensually, always. As much approached as approaching. And he falls in love with a couple of them. Women represent a kind of ideal for Hesse and Goldmund.
The book is a kind of allegory, as most of Hesse’s books are, a kind of Pilgrim's Progress of the way to life, somewhat updated from Bunyan's view. Since Hesse knows we do not want to read a novel about Narcissus in prayer, the book focuses on the multiple transformations of Goldmund, from abbey to road, something that connects women with his own mother, and also The Universal Mother, the great feminine spirit that he needs to get in touch with. And get in touch with them he does indeed. I haven’t read this book in decades, but I can clearly see again why Hesse was such a popular author during the sixties’ sexual revolution.
“On the Road to Find Out,” Cat Stevens:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KHo_Y...
At one point, Goldmund is offered a wonderful artisan position by Nicholas, a mentor and teacher, based on his obvious artistic skills, but he responds as anyone might do in 1968; he turns down the job and says, no, nope, that’s too conventional, that's working for The Man, "I must be free.” Cue “Free Bird” or several other sixties romantic songs, and view here a meme from On The Road. The road of “self-discovery,” which initially is mainly wine, women and song. But lust, he finds, is only good for the short term. In the long term sex is like any drug, leading to a desert of want. And you already knew that, maybe, so are not surprised to find that the time of hot and heavy page-turning will have to come to an end. This is, after all, Hesse and not Peyton Place. In other words, if Woman is an ideal for Goldmund, he needs to see Heer as Spirit, as Soul, and not just Body, to learn that path for himself.
And right: This is, as I said, a novel about the middle ages, the time of The Plague; which of course has a sobering effect on the party, though Goldmund still seeks ways to sing and love and find joy.
“Because the world is so full of death and horror, I try again and again to console my heart and pick the flowers that grow in the midst of hell.”
But eventually, all this death (recall the original title) takes its toll on Goldmund's love fest, and he returns to Nicholas’s workshop to work, to art, reconnecting as well in the process with the monastery, and Narcissus, whom he teaches to do art even as Narcissus teaches Goldmund more about spiritual practice. The point here is that these two twin souls, these opposites attracted to each other, need to both be present in one person; Mind and Body, lover of God and lover of the world. It can happen, Hesse says, in principled (and clearly romantic) ways.
“We are sun and moon, dear friend; we are sea and land. It is not our purpose to become each other; it is to recognize each other, to learn to see the other and honor him for what he is: each the other's opposite and complement.”
Hesse does create binaries, between the Apollonian and Dionysian, the masculine and the feminine, a further development of the ideas I associate mostly with Demian, and they feel to me a bit out of date, but they are nevertheless interesting and useful for any young seeker. And, as with Joyce’s Stephen, Goldmund and Hesse choose Art as their spiritual vocation, their way to live a “unified” life. And love (body and soul) as part of this process, of course.
“We fear death, we shudder at life's instability, we grieve to see the flowers wilt again and again, and the leaves fall, and in our hearts we know that we, too, are transitory and will soon disappear. When artists create pictures and thinkers search for laws and formulate thoughts, it is in order to salvage something from the great dance of death, to make something last longer than we do.”
I really liked reading this book again and seeing in it some of my own early struggles, thanks TD. I read Thomas Merton’s Seven Story Mountain in my late teens/early twenties and loved it; it made me commit to some form of a spiritual life, which is always still evolving for me. I was in theater, I was a writer, too, but chose teaching as my vocation, and ultimately chose a more conventional family life over the road. This book and all Hesse’s works were part of my learning how to live in the world.
Oh, and you know the contemporary term “woke”? Here’s Hesse on the topic, in 1930:
“I call that man awake who, with conscious knowledge and understanding, can perceive the deep unreasoning powers in his soul, his whole innermost strength, desire and weakness, and knows how to reckon with himself.” Who wouldn't want to be "woke" in that way? -
عن ثنائية العقل و الروح
المادة و الفكر.
عن إنعزال في الدير أو غوص في غمار الحياة
عن كل الأضداد و الثنائيات
تحدث هسه بالأسلوب مزج بين سلاسة السرد و عمق الفكرة.
أخيرا رواية نجحت في مزج بين الاستمتاع و الفكر.
رائعة .
أكملتها رابعة صباحا 😊🌸
21/mars/20🌸
. -
This is not a review. This is an expression of gratitude.
Enlightened does not begin to describe the feeling one gets when eyes see, mind is set in motion, and images are processed into thoughts that seed the way we look at everything. We SEE everything in a new light, at least for as long as we remember what is important, what makes a difference. The beginning of our true life. I suppose all we can ask of our mind is for a few moments of enlightenment at a time. And, to remember. Too much would be overkill, too little starvation. Let us be comforted with whatever ration of enlightenment we are allowed. Let us not forget that we are allowed these moments, we are not entitled them.
Herr Hesse, with your beautiful words, you allowed me to imagine enlightenment, to see, to take nothing for granted. -
این کتاب رو به لاکپشت وارترین شکل ممکن خوندم چون اصلا دلم نمی خواست تموم بشه ، اما افسوس که هر شروعی بالاخره پایانی هم به همراه داره
کتاب "نارتسیس و گلدموند" شاهکار دیگری هست از "هسه" که مانند بسیاری از آثار او، ساختاری دو قطبی دارد... یکی قطب مادرانه و مادینه که به جنبه های فلسفی از قبیل عشق ،هنر و لذت می پردازد و دیگری قطب پدرانه یا نرینه که جنبه های تفکر و منطق را در بر می گیرد
این نویسنده ی خوش ذوق و هنرمند این بار معجونی گوارا پدید آورده که در آن از تمامی عناصر شخصیت پردازی، توصیفات و تشبیهات ، آرایه ها و کنایه ها به غایت بهره برده و می تواند سیراب کننده ی عطش اشتیاق هر خواننده ای باشد
نوشتن ریویوی کامل در باب این کتاب رو به بعد موکول می کنم ، فقط چند توصیه برای دوستانی دارم که مایل به مطالعه ی این کتاب هستند
اول اینکه از این کتاب دو نسخه با ترجمه ی بسیار خوب سروش حبیبی وجود داره ، یکی نسخه ای که اخیرا" و از طرف نشر چشمه چاپ شده و دیگری نسخه ای که در سال 1350 چاپ شده
من نسخه ی قدیمی تر رو ترجیح دادم. این نسخه ، کامل و بدون ساسنسور بود(با نسخه ی انگلیسی چک کردم) ، بعد اینکه در نسخه ی نشر چشمه شیوه ی نگارش کتاب به قدری نامفهوم و سخت خوان بود که من نه تنها هیچ لذتی از مطالعه ی کتاب نبردم بلکه درهر صفحه حداقل دو یا سه کلمه ی جدید وجود داشت که اصلا در زبان فارسی به گوش من نخورده بود چه برسه به اینکه معنی این کلمه ها رو بدونم
:))
با این حال اگر باز هم نسخه ی نشر چشمه را انتخاب کردید یادتون باشه که مقدمه ی کتاب رو بزارید آخر بخونید چون همه ی داستان از ابتدا تا انتها به طور خلاصه در مقدمه توضیح داده شده که از نظر من چندان خوشایند نبود
در آخر اینکه می تونید نسخه ی پی دی اف و بدون سانسور این کتاب رو با نام "نرگس و زرین دهن" در اینترنت پیدا کنید -
This was truly a magical reading experience for me. It came out of nowhere -- I'd never heard of this particular title before, despite my bibliophilic tendencies, and I had always avoided reading Hesse out of some nonsense premonition that I wouldn't enjoy his writing style. I was so wrong about that last part.
A dear friend loaned this book to me while I was hospitalized last spring. The hideous front cover was held on by a thread, and didn't even make it to the finish line. The pages were brown, marked up. It was slow-going at first, with all the endless conversations about monastery life, and I ended up putting it on hold. But at least I had enough sense to realize it was my less-than-ideal reading environment, combined with my slipshod state of mind at the time, to know that it wasn't the book itself, but the circumstances surrounding my reading of it.
When I picked it up again, my affection for Narcissus and Goldmund was almost immediate. Set in medieval Germany, this book is not exactly a fantasy, but it has that sense of timelessness that I imagine characterizes epic fantasy. It explores huge themes: duality, the human longing for purpose, aging and mortality, the nature of art, the conflict between flesh and spirit. (I'd probably be able to explain it better if I had read more philosophy texts in college.) The philosophical musings don't feel ultra-ponderous; they're luscious and they flow and they feel intrinsic to the story.
This whole book is sensual as fuck. Goldmund is a ladies' man, dedicating his young adulthood to the art of seduction and the pleasures of the flesh. The depictions of women are sometimes problematic -- although I do commend Hesse for never buying into the whole virgin/whore dichotomy -- but this was such a small grievance for me that it didn't ruin my experience.
I won't belabor my review with a plot summary. It's best to just dip your feet straight into the warm bath of its bewitching language. -
When I was a child my parents used to punish me for my bad actions in their own way: I often had the prohibition of reading for a week.
Of course I wasn't so nerd at that time and together with reading there could be no tv, no bmx rides with friends, no late night awake and all sorts of "normal" don'ts.
But the worst one was definitely the "no reading week".
Later in my teenage years, I remember how my mum was very glad about my reading activity, but not particularly interested in influencing that favourite pastime of mine with her tips. As far as I remember the only exception was "Narcissus and Goldmund".
"Mum, I read "Candide". How nice it was!"
"Good for you. But you should rather read Narcissus and Goldmund".
"Mum, "The Buddenbrooks" is very interesting. What a surprise!"
"Very well. Yet, you would appreciate more "Narcissus and Goldmund".
"Mum, I have to admit it: "Rosshalde" is kind of interesting".
"Yes. But that's nothing compared to "Narcissus and Goldmund": you might read it!".
"Mum, this "Elective affinities" is a masterpiece of romanticism".
"I know, but why don't you read "Narcissus and Goldmund?" You must do it!"
Ok, I resisted for many years. When I was younger I never liked when people were forcing me to read anything. At school, in family.
Then came my late twenties and I finally capitulated: I took "Narcissus and Goldmund" in my hands.
Albeit the awful, terrifying front cover graphic chosen by the Italian editor (think about the name "Hesse" wrote in the same style, way and colours of the notorious "Esso" logo on a grey background...) I decided to leaf through the book pages.
I was really surprised. After managing to win over the first "philosophical" part of the novel, that I found a bit too slow, I discovered a surprisingly libertine book. Not that bad, of course, but exactly the opposite I would have expected as a tip from my mum.
Eventually "Narcissus and Goldmund" was an involving reading. Although I think that sometimes Hesse stumbles on the thin line between allegory and parody, this book worths a reading. I like the historical-yet-undetermined contest of the book even if the Goldmund character doesn't look that realistic to me. The way Goldmund walks around the world is very "Candidesque" and picaresque and I do like this sort of mood.
At the same time, Herman Hesse is more accurate and, in my opinion, does a better job in picturing Narcissus, who at least behaves as a man in his adulthood rather than a whimsical, naive boy as Goldmund stays for the whole book without having a real evolution despite all the life (and sexual) experiences he had. I know this won't be appreciated by those who consider this book formative, but the same comeback of Goldmund to the monastery where he spent his earlier pious years looks more like a defeat than as an inner development of him.
Now I just wonder if my mum wished to make a Narcissus or a Goldmund out of me. Frankly I'm a bit scared to ask her.
-
Perhaps this book is interesting as an example of the dichotomization of body/mind, angel/whore, ascete/wayfarer. Put the dicktalk aside (which is no small task here) and you still have an enormous vine from which to swing back and forth from pole to pole. At best woman is subject here, at worst she so thoroughly blends into the background she's invisible. More than bleak considering this is a meditation on the roles of the artist and thinker (and never the twain shall meet mind you) in a modern world. While i suppose Hesse was trying to justify the new free-thinking, free-loving, long hair wearing male artist of the twentieth century, he really does less to exhort new modes of being and more towards the reinforcement of woman-loathing Cartesian dualism. She is both giver and taker away and yet completely and utterly powerless as an entity free of him, the center; she has no option but to be both the beginning and end of him. No no no. Nope.
-
Video Review
This is one of my all-time favourites, it's a full-bodied novel. Somehow I forgot to write a written review for this one, so these are my lasting impressions.
This is a coming-of-age, or more perfectly put "Bildungsroman", adventure story, one that I think is particularly important for male readers. Narcissus & Goldmund is a story that exhaustively contrasts the dichotomous lifestyles of two men raised religiously as Christian monks: the artist and thinker. While they oppose each other in practice, they unify each other in the world, and so Hesse is saying that the world needs all types of people, though not everyone's life is easy. The majority of the story is Goldmund struggling as an artist, and we see his flaws are in his stubbornness and arrogance. There are times where Goldmund could have made his life easier. By contrast, Narcissus stays true to his sense of order, but his life is barren and colourless without Goldmund. There is no way Narcissus could've improved his life.
It is, to say, that the thinker lives a safer, more boring and lonely life, and the artist lives a more dangerous, exciting and passionate life. There's a cost and benefit to both, but union between these two types of people lessens the cost for both. We must form alliances with those we are unfamiliar with. And this is all before the more religious, core message of this story, that is the need and desire for spiritual atonement.
Despite the debauchery of Goldmund it could be said that the 'homoerotic' (although it's clearly non-sexual) undertones between these two fellows is the crux of the story. I feel they love each other more than any of the women, from the start to the finish. It is a pure and perfect brotherhood that will render even a surface-level reading into an enjoyable and enlightening experience.
—[original]—
I spent 12 hours reading this book yesterday, and I have just finished it. I don't normally read for more than an hour a day. I need time to gather my thoughts, review TBC. -
Stilul lui Hesse, cel puțin în cartea de față, nu m-a prins, probabil și din cauza subiectului: două personaje diametral opuse, cu viziuni diferite în ceea ce privește dragostea dar și, în general, asupra vieții.
Un călugăr și un sculptor trăiesc întreaga viață așa cum își doresc, unul iubește și călătorește, celălalt trăiește în rugăciune și izolare. La un moment dat sculptorul, simțindu-și sfârșitul aproape, are o revelație și își schimbă crezul. De ce?
Nu m-a prins, și nici nu am alergat. Scuze, Hesse! -
"Noi pensatori cerchiamo di avvicinarci a Dio staccando il mondo da lui. Tu ti avvicini a lui amando e ricreando la sua creazione. Sono entrambe opere umane e inadeguate, ma l'arte è più innocente."
Questo non è un libro che andrebbe letto a diciannove anni. Diciannove sono già troppi. Andrebbe letto prima, a quattordici o a quindici, quando il mondo lo si vede ancora in modo diverso. Io, da ragazzo, ci leggo qualcosa di diverso rispetto a quello che avrei potuto leggerci da ragazzino. O rispetto a quello che potrò leggerci tra venti, trenta, quarant'anni. Il mondo che vediamo attraverso gli occhi di Boccadoro è un mondo che sembra uscito da una favola. Sia nei suoi aspetti negativi che in quelli positivi. Tralasciando il fattore stilistico e le capacità di Hesse, proprio di questo stiamo parlando: di una favola. E la conseguenza è che una favola, bene o male, affascina e commuove. Una favola fa riflettere. Apre gli occhi oppure fa innervosire. E questa fa tutto insieme.
Boccadoro è una figura resa estrema e quasi buffa nella sua continua ricerca di piacere e di nuovo. Come il Lucio di Apuleio, Boccadoro si macchia - ripetutamente - del peccato di curiositas. Questo suo cercare nasce all'inizio del romanzo, quando l'amico Narciso prova a fargli capire quale sia la sua vera vocazione attraverso dialoghi che ricordano molto la contrapposizione nicciana tra spirito dionisiaco e spirito apollineo. Narciso e Boccadoro sono due facce della stessa medaglia: la vita. Essi rappresentano due condizioni esistenziali diverse, condizioni che possono e devono convivere.
"«[...] Non è il nostro compito, quello d'avvicinarci, così come non s'avvicinano fra loro il sole e la luna, o il mare e la terra. Noi due, caro amico, siamo il sole e la luna, siamo il mare e la terra. La nostra meta non è di trasformarci l'uno nell'altro, ma di conoscerci l'un l'altro e d'imparare a vedere nell'altro ciò ch'egli è: il nostro opposto e il nostro complemento»."
Vedete, la vita di Boccadoro è caricaturale perché Hesse doveva spiegare la fanciullezza e l'arte attraverso questo personaggio. Mi ha irritato sì, è risultato spesso ripetitivo e mi ha fatto capire che non vorrò mai scrivere un romanzo in questo modo, ma è anche riuscito nel suo intento, e per questo lo lodo. Hesse è un grande filosofo e un poco abile scrittore. Infatti mi è riuscito molto antipatico Boccadoro e tanto simpatico Narciso. Perché io ormai ho diciannove anni e non quattordici o quindici.
"Narciso lo guardò, grave: «Io ti prendo sul serio quando sei Boccadoro. Ma tu non sei sempre Boccadoro. Io non mi auguro altro se non che tu divenga Boccadoro in tutto e per tutto. Tu non sei un erudito, tu non sei un monaco... per far un erudito e un monaco basta una stoffa meno preziosa della tua. Tu credi che ti giudichi troppo poco erudito, troppo poco logico o troppo poco pio. No, per me sei troppo poco te stesso»."
Questa frase esprime splendidamente il concetto secondo il quale è importante, anzi, fondamentale, essere se stessi. O meglio: diventare se stessi. Boccadoro diventerà se stesso, sì, ma solo grazie all'aiuto di Narciso. Solo grazie alla sua illuminazione. Troverà l'amore e l'arte ma non troverà mai la felicità. Perché, in un certo senso, la felicità non è una delle facoltà dell'artista. E, in fondo al romanzo, capiamo che forse non è facoltà nemmeno dell'erudito, del pensatore, dell'uomo sereno ed equilibrato. Forse non è facoltà nemmeno di Narciso.
Io credo che regalerei questo libro a persone più giovani di me, sebbene non sarà mai tra i miei libri preferiti. Lo regalerei perché potrebbe diventare il loro, di libro preferito. Potrebbe dare una prospettiva di vita in un momento cruciale del proprio percorso, ovvero i primi passi nel mondo dell'adolescenza. E la risposta, queste persone a cui regalerei il libro, la troverebbero quasi sicuramente in Boccadoro. Io, che ho diciannove anni, non l'ho trovato né in Narciso né in Boccadoro. Per me questo libro non ha riservato risposte, ma solo altri dubbi. Una favola crudele. Nel bene e nel male, però, resta uno specchio reale dell'animo umano. -
Hermann Hesse (1877 - 1962)
http://www.hessemontagnola.ch/ (site da Fundação Herman Hesse Montagnola)
Hermann Hesse nasceu em 1877 na Alemanha, naturalizou-se em 1923 suiço e faleceu em 1962 em Montagnola, Suiça. Em 1946 recebe o Prémio Nobel da Literatura ”por seus escritos inspirados que, enquanto crescem em audácia e penetração, exemplificam os ideais humanitários e as altas qualidades de estilo.”.
"Narciso era moreno e seco, enquanto Goldmund se mostrava brilhante e pródigo. Enquanto Narciso era um pensador e analítico, Goldmund parecia ser um sonhador com uma alma infantil. Mas, apesar de todos os antagonismos, ligava-os um traço comum: ambos eram seres distintos, diferenciando-se dos outros por percetíveis talentos e atributos, e ambos tinham recebido do destino uma especial premonição.
Narciso interessava-se ardentemente por aquela alma juvenil, cujo carácter e o destino ele rapidamente reconhecera. Também Goldmund admirava com todo o fervor aquele seu mestre, sempre belo, superior e inteligente.” (Pág. 22)
É facilmente entendível que Hermann Hesse contando a história ou as histórias das suas duas personagens – Narciso e Goldmund, - pretende analisar e ponderar sobre incontáveis temáticas e inúmeros conteúdos, meditando sobre aspectos profundos e filosóficos da vida humana.
Com a génese do romance a estruturar-se e a fundamentar-se em combinações dicotómicas – recorrendo aos dois estilos de vida de Narciso e Goldmund – que numa primeira fase são coincidentes, convergindo nos princípios, nas convicções e nas acções -; mas que gradualmente seguem caminhos opostos, vivendo ideais de vida drasticamente discrepantes, dissonantes sobre como a vida deve ser vivida. Por um lado, existe uma vida espiritual e piedosa, assente na religiosidade e na fé, com a devoção e o fervor sagrado a dominarem; por outro lado, deparamos com um estilo de vida assente na aventura, na coragem e na imprevisibilidade, associando-se ao prazer físico, ao erotismo e ao amor, mas, igualmente, ao adultério e à infidelidade; e a uma ilimitada vida artística.
"Narciso e Goldmund” (1930) é um magnífico romance que gravita em torno da descoberta individual mútua, da luta e da conciliação entre dois estilos de vida antagónico - numa história que se desenrola na Idade Média, mas que permanece intemporal -; onde se vão confrontando paradoxos insondáveis, numa abordagem e distanciamento gradual que caracterizam a componente mais íntima da existência humana – em primeiro plano, o amor; em segundo plano, a arte.
O Amor
”O seu juvenil desejo de amar tinha acabado de ser poderosamente despertado pela imagem e pelo beijo de uma rapariga bonita. Simultaneamente, a consciência do próprio desejo assustara-o e lançara-o no desespero, pois sentia no mais íntimo de si que todos os sonhos e projetos de vida que até aí acalentara, tudo aquilo para que se julgara chamado e destinado, tudo isso ameaçava agora ruir, depois daquele beijo à janela, perante o olhar daqueles olhos escuros.” (Pág. 35)
A Arte
"Goldmund não pertencia àquele tipo de artistas insatisfeitos, que, muito embora possuindo notáveis talentos, nunca conseguem encontrar os meios adequados para os expressar. Há pessoas assim, capazes de sentir a beleza do mundo com profundidade e grandeza e de transportar na alma imagens elevadas e nobres, mas que não encontram o caminho e os meios para delas se libertarem, transmitindo-as e comunicando-as para satisfação dos outros. Goldmund não sofria dessa carência." (Pág. 181 - 182)
”Goldmund sentia que através da arte e da vida de artista tinha a possibilidade de conciliar os seus profundos antagonismos, ou pelo menos de criar magníficas e sempre novas metáforas sobre a ambivalência da sua natureza. Mas a arte não era pura dádiva, não era de modo nenhum gratuita, ela tinha um preço elevado e exigia-lhe sacrifícios constantes. Durante mais de três anos sacrificara-lhe já o mais supremo e imprescindível bem que conhecia, para além do êxtase amoroso; a sua liberdade.” (Pág. 194)
Aguarelas de Hermann Hesse (in Fondazione Hermann Hesse Montagnola)
Montagnola, 1929
Bei Montagnola, 1929
Blick auf Magliaso und Ponte Tresa, 1928
Monte Boglia in Schnee, 1933 -
Qual è l'ideale di vita che può vantare valore universale e assoluto? L'esistenza condotta da Narciso, dedito alla vita monastica, alle privazioni, alle regole o la vita dell'artista Boccadoro, raminga, spensierata, dedita alla continua scoperta? Sicuramente entrambe, visto che entrambi i protagonisti le perseguono sino in fondo. Sicuramente nessuna delle due, visto che in entrambi i protagonisti si avverte un celato senso d'insoddisfazione e, forse, il desiderio di partecipare della vita che non hanno scelto. Entrambe scelte vincenti, entrambe fallimenti. Perché (forse è la lezione che Hesse voleva trasmetterci), non esistono ideali di vita assoluti, ma solo continue ricerche, continue scoperte di sé che ci conducono in un viaggio che non conosce mai fine o compimento, ma solo susseguenti trasformazioni.
-
Otro de mis libros favoritos! Una hermosa y profunda prosa, característica de H.Hesse. Una historia de esas que calan y recordarás por siempre. Trata de la historia de dos amigos totalmente distintos que se conocen en un convento. El uno se marcha a vivir la vida fuera de la religión y deleitarse con todas las mujeres que se cruzan en el camino. El otro, se profesionaliza en la religión y al final ambos se reencontrarán cuando menos se lo piensan y en una situación bastante particular.
“Era una suerte que el amor no precisase de palabras; de otro modo, estaría lleno de equivocaciones y disparates”.
“La vida, evidentemente, llevaba en sí una especie de culpa”.
“Es curioso, se decía, lo que acontece con las mujeres y el amor: no necesitan, en realidad, de palabras”.
Top libro! -
1 STERN, weil 0 nicht geht ★✩✩✩✩
Dieses Buch empfehle ich niemanden.… das könnte ich mir selbst nicht verzeihen.
⤐ Vorwort.
Meldet sich jemand freiwillig, mir absofort alle Klassiker aus der Hand zu reißen? Jedes mal absolute Zeitverschwendung, das rant-review ist noch das Lustigste an dem ganzen Prozedere.
⤐ Insgesamt.
Damit wär's geklärt: finde deutsche Klassiker genau so unbefriedigend wie alle anderen auch. Vielleicht vorweg in paar Worte zu meiner Motivation, dieses Buch überhaupt in die Hand zu nehmen. Ich kann die meisten "Klassiker" der Literatur nicht leiden: ich finde den Erzählstil entfremdent, die Geschichten zumeist ermüdend, ganz zu schweigen von den moralischen Standards und Logiken.
Vor einem halben Jahr hab ich allerdings mitbekommen, dass es eine deutsche Neuverfilmung von Narziß und Goldmund geben soll, in den Hauptrollen einige meiner liebsten deutschen Schauspieler. Im Nachhinein weiß ich, dass der Trailer bereits verrät, dass mitunter stark vom Original abgewichen wird - und obwohl ich ja sonst dem Team "Das Buch war besser" angehöre, wage ich es zu behaupten, dass die Abweichung vermutlich ein Gewinn für das Filmerlebnis sein wird.
Vorab eine kleine Charakterzusammenfassung von Goldmund: Hätte Goldmund ein Instagram Profil, sein meistgebrauchter hashtag wäre #wanderlust, dicht gefolgt von #ladykiller. Hochladen würde er träumerische Landschaftsbilder, Kunst und nackte Frauen, natürlich ohne um vorher um Erlaubnis zu fragen. Narziß würde unter nem fake Profil alles liken weil er eigentlich auch gern die Welt sehen will aber halt ein Schisser ist.✥ Das große Thema von Narziß und Goldmund ist der Weg des Einzelnen: jeder muss sein Leben anders leben. Mich beschleicht allerdings das Gefühl, hätte eine Frau einen ähnlichen Weg wie Goldmund eingeschlagen, hätte das so ziemlich keiner gefeiert. #doppelmoral, was mich gleich zum nächsten Punkt führt:
✥ Frauen als Objekt der Begierde trotzdem im Hintergrund: Das hat mich fasziniert und angeekelt zugleich. Der liebeshungrige Goldmund verzehrt sich buchstäblich nach Frauen, und dennoch sind sie im Buch so ungriffig wie die Idee, dass man Classics tatsächlich genießen kann. Im Zuge dessen müssen sexuell aktive Frauen natürlich erstmal geshamet werden! All hail den "Jungfrauen", die viel begehrenswerter sind als Frauen die gern Sex haben...
✥ Frauenroman für Männer: Das Buch liest sich wie n "Frauenroman", aber die Zielgruppe sind Leser die nicht zugeben können dass sie Groschenromane genießen. Weil, wenn's der Mann macht ist's ja was anderes;) Dazu past auch...
✥ ...fuckboy alert: Denn ein "richtig gutes Buch" wäre ja nicht ein solches, wenn der HC nicht schön brav die Frauen gegeneinander ausspielen würde. Zu einem Zeitpunkt will er mit beiden Schwestern gleichzeitig Sex haben, obwohl die eine es nur aus Boshaftigkeit und die andere nur aus Leid mitgemacht hätte. Ich schlage eine Titeländerung vor: Das Buch sollte Narziß und der fuckboy heißen.
✥ Pädophelie überall: Nicht nur in der Religion allgemein - wo es zu erwarten ist (disappointed but not surprised) sondern auch in From von einem Haufen alter (wie alt genau weiß man nie) Frauen, die sich an einen Teenager ran machen? Ewwww.
✥ Lise, Lydia und Co.: Ich hab mich außerdem gewundert, warum fast alle Liebschaften Goldmunds den Buchstaben L zum Initialten haben. Versteckte Message? Mommy Issues von Herrmann persönlich? Bitte klärt mich auf.
Mag jetzt nicht mehr weiter mich aufregen, selbst in der Isolation ist das Leben viel zu schön dafür. #fürimmerhassdenKlassikern
⤐ Die Geschichte
In dieser Geschichte treffen zwei absolute Gegenteile aufeinander; Narziß, ein gottesfürchtigier Ordensbruder, und Goldmund, ein wanderlustiger Charmeur. Während der eine seine Verwirklichung in Buchseiten und Predigten findet, lechzt der andere nach dem Unbekannten. Und so zieht Goldmund in die Welt hinaus, um seinen eigenen Weg zu gehen, ganz so wie Narziß im Dienst Gottes seine Verwirklichung findet. Schnallt euch an, denn sonst fallt ihr vor Langeweile vom Stuhl. Doppelmoralige Erzählung von einem kleinen Jungen, der nix will außer seine Mama ubnd seinem besten Freund, aber zu stolz ist, sein gebrochenes Ich offen zuzugeben. [Freud stürmt das Zimmer mit Hyperanalysen] -
Ich habe Hesse in Jugendjahren verschlungen und damals Narziß und Goldmund als mein liebstes Werk gekürt. Nun war ich gespannt, welche Wirkung es nach über 30 Jahren auf mich haben würde. Letztlich bin ich gefestigt in meiner Meinung. Ich finde, es ist eine wunderbare Lektüre, auch wenn Kritiker Hesse hier Mittelmäßigkeit, Trivialität und Romantisierung vorwerfen.
Das Buch spielt im Mittelalter in Süddeutschland, wahrscheinlich im 14. Jahrhundert aufgrund des Auftretens der Pest. Hesse wählt bewusst eine Sprache, die zwar altertümlich-romantisch klingt, aber keineswegs zeitgemäß bei Erscheinen des Buchs war. Ende der 20er Jahre schrieb Hesse diesen Entwicklungsroman in seiner neuen Schweizer Heimat, während die Weimarer Republik ums Überleben kämpfte und das Deutschtum sich langsam von seiner hässlichen Seite zeigte. In diesem Tohuwabohu setzt er diese romantische Erzählung als Gegenentwurf in die Welt, wo vieles „hold“ und „lieblich“ ist. Mir gefällt dieses gegen den Strom schwimmen von Hesse.
Sein Thema ist die Suche nach Vollkommenheit, nach dem Wesen des Seins. Narziß und Goldmund sind Lehrer und Schüler in einem Kloster zu Beginn der Erzählung. Narziß ist der Denker, der Asket, der Geistesmensch, die männliche Seite, der über den Intellekt sich auf der Suche nach der Vollkommenheit macht. Goldmund als sein Schüler ist scheinbar der Gegensatz von ihm, der Genußmensch, der Künstler, gefühlvoll und voller Wolllust und Liebestrieb, die weibliche Seite, der über die Kunst sich der Vollkommenheit nähert, nachdem er das Kloster verlässt und sich auf Wanderschaft begibt. Manche Reviewer kritisieren, dass die Beiden Antipoden sind, dass Hesse zu sehr schwarz-weiß zeichnet. Das sehr ich nicht so, denn sowohl in Narziß als auch in Goldmund steckt auch ein Teil des jeweils Anderen. Es gibt keine reine Ausprägung dieser Charaktereigenschaften und am Ende des Buchs, als die Beiden als alte Männer wieder zusammen kommen, ist Goldmund der Lehrer für Narziß, der inzwischen Abt Johannes heißt. Dieser erkennt, dass sich der Freund über die Kunst (Bildhauerei) viel mehr dem wahren Leben und der Urmutter nähern konnte. „Zwei Seelen wohnen, ach, in meiner Brust“: selbst bei Goethe werden die Kräfte, die in einem modernen, intelligenten Menschen ziehen, der Geist und Körper, thematisiert. Hesse hat die Antwort gefunden, in dem er den Weg Goldmunds trotz dessen Entbehrungen, der ständigen Begegnungen mit dem Tod und die Ruhelosigkeit als den Erstrebenswertesten darstellt. Mich hat das als Jugendlicher fasziniert, wie Goldmund für eine Sache brennt, welche Leidenschaft er an den Tag legt bei seiner künstlerischen Arbeit wie in seinem Umgang mit den vielen Frauen, die er in seinem langen Leben beglückt. Letztlich ist die Kunst das Bindeglied zwischen Geist und Körper. Eine Vorstellung, die mir nach wie vor gefällt. -
Philosophical? Definitely. Novel Entertainment? oh yes. What the author meant by this writing? Well, like any true art- that depends on the audience. I can go into all the philosophical existential yakkity yak that a lot of other people might get from Narcissus and Goldmund, but instead I'm gonna give you the nuts and bolts (ie pared down yakkity yak) of what I saw in it.
Goldmund is a born artist with a innate bent toward the agony and bliss of wanting to eat life- not just watch it parade on by through a view from a window. Narcissus is his opposite. He is the thinker, the one who excises feelings and exalts logic and the mind above all else.
But this book isn't about two people, it's about one. You, the reader. Narcissus and Goldmund are an allegory of the dichotomy of man, the struggle of balancing and preferring one aspect of who you are to another, because- Dear God, are we complex.
One part longs to experience life and run at it full tilt, but the logical part says a life like that is reckless and cannot be sustained.
Narcissus always loved Goldmund, more than that- admired his young friend's natural beauty and talents, despite the fact he was his polar opposite- and that kept him on stable ground. It took a lifetime of wandering for Goldmund to come to the same conclusion about Narcissus- unfortunately he only found stability at the very end.
Some might think the ending for Goldmund one of disappointment- but really, only one could survive in this tale of a search for inner peace. Truly it could only be elder, settled wisdom who would survive.
Just like Narcissus, for one to find that kind of peace, you must reconcile every part of yourselves and integrate them into the whole- accepted, just as they are. Too many never get that.
As one who often struggled in the past with this exact same duality- I thoroughly enjoyed this novel- not only did it startle my Narcissus with its alarming insight it appeased the passionate Goldmund in me with it's bawdiness at times. :P
It's books like these that make me glad I'm a reader. -
Whew! What can I say of this book that may convey all that is there?!
If you want to dissect it from an analytical point of view, let's say that it was heavily influenced by Nietzsche's theory of the Apollonian versus Dionysian spirit as well as by Jung's archetypal structure (anima/animus, etc..).
The pure essence of this duality is almost tangible in this novel to the extreme and it is an intense and very exhausting reading experience.
Life and death, science and art, mind and heart, soul and body and their division, yet unity is represented so forcefully in this novel that it absorbed me completely.
