Classics and the Western Canon discussion
The Magic Mountain
>
Background and Resources
Wendel wrote: "That is interesting because we can (and I do) read the MM as a testimonial of Mann's struggle with (parts of) his cultural tradition. It is clear that this struggle was by no means over when the MM was finished. I'm afraid it is not over even now, especially not in formerly communist Eastern-Central Europe."I read a few critical essays in preparation for this discussion, and I don't think it's a spoiler to note that most of them think that Mann was talking more broadly about the political and cultural struggles which were going on more broadly in Europe at the time. It seems important that we have an International Sanatorium, and that Mann makes a point of the national origins of many of the characters (that there are "good Russians" and "bad Russians" is particularly interesting; so far we haven't really seen in what way they are good or bad, or if we have I have missed it, but I hope we see that at some point).
At any rate, I am personally not seeing that broader aspect of the novel very distinctly at this point. If others are, I hope they will say so, and say how.
In post 43, Lily posted a clip on Mann and Freud which, as she noted, was not a spoiler but had an interesting thought that some may have missed, but I think may be worth our considering."Mann's ability of making the thoughts of others his own, without 'buying into' any doctrinal system, is precisely what enabled him to understand the nature of myth and to be an author who could transform the ideas and thoughts of others into the story that transcended their supposed individual originality...."
Re post 52 by Everyman>>I read a few critical essays in preparation for this discussion, and I don't think it's a spoiler to note that most of them think that Mann was talking more broadly about the political and cultural struggles which were going on more broadly in Europe at the time.<<<Interesting. I was just writing something to this effect in the 2.1 thread as that is how I view this book as well... yes, "doctrinal systems" were effecting such major shifts in the world...that a strong reaction was evidenced in visual arts and literature and in other ways as well. Perhaps Mann used this book as an attempt to sort it all out.
Everyman wrote: "At any rate, I am personally not seeing that broader aspect of the novel very distinctly at this point."I agree. I see at least two "building sites" of thought, but I still do not know what will be built there:
a) The personal character of Hans Castorp, the typical German in transition from pre- to post-war? Hm.
b) Struggle of doctrinal systems: Humanism is Settembrini, different nations (German nation is Joachim and Hans Castorp). - ? Hm?
Psychoanalysis as a driver of questions and change - or producer of problems? Hm.
Hi guys! Hope you are all well! You might remember me from about two years ago. I loved this group but it and Chris's group ate away all my time, and so sadly I had to go cold turkey. ..but GR gradually pulled me back in again, and I thought I'd pop in here and see what you're doing. ..and now feeling very sad that I hadn't a month earlier, because I've been wanting to do this book for quite a time now.Oh well, I'll just lurk and soak in what you guys are saying like I used to do. :D
Lily wrote@35: "Translations to go with text from Wendel (see Week 2.2, Msg 18)..."Some additional observations:
- I said 'wordcount', but in fact I counted only lines. From Lily's work we now know that the number of words in the original is not higher. What is different, is the length of the words used. The German ones are much longer.
- Vergeistigung - spiritualisation: a word without clear meaning (Mann uses apostrophes) - in translation it became 'ennobling effects' or 'spiritual redemption.'
- und übrigens - and by the way: the literal translation was felt inappropriate by both translators, it ended up as 'though' or 'whereby'
- In der Regel - as a rule: Woods opts for 'normally'
- In the long sentence opening with 'In der Regel' we are led to a highpoint, using many roling r's and strong gutturals: that is what made me think of 'virile': überwuchert wichtigkeit reißt widerwärtigste
- The final sentence is just one thundering kettle drum roll. It shows what Mann's German is capable of. It is also a bit spooky, if I may say so.
Traveller wrote: "Hi guys! Hope you are all well! You might remember me from about two years ago. I loved this group but it and Chris's group ate away all my time, and so sadly I had to go cold turkey. ..but GR g..."
Traveller! So good to see you!
Traveller! So good to see you!
Wendel wrote: "The final sentence is just one thundering kettle drum roll. It shows what Mann's German is capable of. It is also a bit spooky, if I may say so...."Wendel -- I just added your msg 57 as another < spoiler > to msg 35 so readers (me!) can readily look at the two together.
This has intrigued me for a several reasons: 1) my volunteer work brings me pretty regularly into the world of the ill, often the terminally ill, so I have been slowly developing a concept of what it means to be "healthily ill," even onto "terminally ill," 2) it has given me a chance to play (for a few minutes only!) with the language I neglected to learn, 3) your use of the word "virile" gave an excuse to explore a bit something that has felt noticeable ever since starting to read MM, but to which I had put little thought.
The German language itself has a masculine "feel" about it for me -- I don't know if linguists comment on that or not. ("Mensch" feels "male" rather than inclusive -- yet it seems frequently embedded in words applicable to both genders. Now, I am sure the same accusation can be made about the word "man"....) Still, let me go on. So far, MM has seemed so male oriented for me. The women are not part of the intellectual conversations, or if they are, their role seems trivialized or mocked or silly. It is taking me back to the discipline of my reading pre-1960-'70's to be able to consistently (and as appropriate) read "human" where "man" is written, even though the translators seem to have done some smoothing. MM is a story told from a world predating the possibilities of an Angela Merkel, and I have a sense that is adding to my difficulties in reading it.
Can I adequately defend or totally justify what I have just written -- probably not.
Traveller wrote: "Oh well, I'll just lurk and soak in what you guys are saying like I used to do."We aren't that far into the book, you can easily catch up. And don't you think we deserve the benefit of your thinking since this is a book you've been wanting to read for some time?
Be brave. Give it a go!
Michael Kohlhaas
by Heinrich von KleistThis book was drawn to my attention on another board. Given that it is positioned as a short German classic, would it be appropriate as a possible interim read upon finishing The Magic Mountain?
I don't know more than enough to bring it to our attention.
Lily wrote: "Wendel wrote: "what Mann's German is capable of..."In the MM Russian is described as 'soft and spineless'. At the time more than a few Germans thought it was in need of guidance by a more 'manly' tongue. An idea they certainly did back up with linguistic research of a kind. Today we don't believe such inquiries can lead to results. While we are bound to have feelings on these matters, these are a matter of taste only.
Concerning the position of women on the MM you must be right. All the main characters are men, and Chauchat is not the exception, being more a stage prop than a character. Moreover, while everyone is mocked, women are ridiculed in a specially careless, underhand way. One reason may be that this is not a psychological novel, but a comedy-grown-into-a-novel-of-ideas thing. It may have something to do with Mann too.
Still, considering the number of gender-unbalanced novels you must have read, are you sure that not something else is bothering you? (There is something particularly unpleasant in the MM atmosphere, but I have no name for it yet).
About the state of medical knowledge on the MM. Two excerpts from Rodney Symington's introduction to his book: Thomas Mann’s The Magic Mountain: A Reader’s Guide, 2011 (http://www.c-s-p.org/Flyers/Thomas-Ma... - sample at: http://www.c-s-p.org/flyers/978-1-443...)."... the actual results were modest: patients stayed in a sanatorium for three months on average (although doctors often tried to persuade them to stay for six to twelve months). At the beginning of the twentieth century up 70% of the patients who came to Davos with infectious tuberculosis died within ten years. (The sanatoria frequently attempted to hide the dying patients—for example, by moving them elsewhere— in order not to undermine the reputation of the resort as a place where people could be cured.) By 1930 and with improved treatment methods, the death rate was still 48%. Harsher critics of the system called the treatment ultimately useless."
"In first two decades of the twentieth century the medical diagnosis relied on observation, touching, tapping, and listening—but above all on the “expertise” of the physician in percussion and auscultation. (The medical procedures described in the novel reflect the practices current in the second decade of the 20 century.) Nowadays we know that these methods, that relied in any case on the mysterious “secret knowledge” of the physician, were highly dubious. Some visitors to Davos were very sceptical—including the mother of Katia Mann, Hedwig Pringsheim, who astutely perceived the questionable alliance of medicine and commerce and declared the entire enterprise to be “bogus.” In fact, many years later when Katja Mann’s original chest x-rays were re-examined, it was discovered that none of them showed any signs of tuberculosis. Thus The Magic Mountain arose, at least in part, out of an incorrect diagnosis."
Wendel wrote: "...Still, considering the number of gender-unbalanced novels you must have read, are you sure that not something else is bothering you? (There is something particularly unpleasant in the MM atmosphere, but I have no name for it yet)."You may be right, Wendel. I know I'm on a bit of a side trip right now on "Weimar Intellectualism" and Lukács on "Franz Kafka or Thomas Mann?" We'll see if I'm capable of pulling anything succinct and sharable out of that morass.
Wendel wrote: " In fact, many years later when Katja Mann’s original chest x-rays were re-examined, it was discovered that none of them showed any signs of tuberculosis. Thus The Magic Mountain arose, at least in part, out of an incorrect diagnosis."Very interesting.
And it wasn't limited to then. My wife's older sister, who was a teacher back in the 1960s, had to undergo regular TB tests. One of them came up positive, she was given a treatment which killed her. It turned out the test was a false positive.
Wendel wrote: "About the state of medical knowledge on the MM. Two excerpts from Rodney Symington's introduction to his book: Thomas Mann’s The Magic Mountain: A Reader’s Guide, 2011 (http://www.c-s-p.org/Flyers/..."
Very interesting. Tnx for posting.
Very interesting. Tnx for posting.
Thorwald wrote: "X-ray devices in the 1920s:http://www.kugener.com/museum-sub.php...
This fits best, I think:
"
Scary! At least to us.
But they were still in, or not long out of, the era of surgery without anesthetics and dentistry without Novocaine. It was a hardier bunch of people than we are today!
No lead shields! (I remember the fluoroscope machines in shoe stores when I was a kid.) Thx for the pix.
There is an interesting column by a young doctor about "good patients" and "bad patients" in the New York Times. I hope this link works.
http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/04...
In case it doesn't he notes how good he felt when he visited a critically ill man who expressed gratitude and reflected on the many blessings in his life.
Then, on other rotations, he encounters dirty, smelling noncompliant patients; but he discovers that sometimes their life stories make their behavior understandable.
This is relevant to Dr. Behrens' "expectations" of patients. The attitude persists in our own time apparently.
I once saw a Hamlet where the insane Ophelia was played not a pathetic, sad, wronged innocent. Instead she acted angry, erratic, "offensive," etc. It affected me powerfully. It took me back to a time when I worked in a shelter for people who were homeless. She reminded me of women I met there. Often they were unruly, uncooperative, not mention smelly. And every night I struggled to remember they were all human beings. I hope I managed to respond to that more often than hiding behind the exigencies of the job.
Reading the piece I wondered if this is too much to ask of Dr. Behrens. Or of our own?
http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/04...
In case it doesn't he notes how good he felt when he visited a critically ill man who expressed gratitude and reflected on the many blessings in his life.
Then, on other rotations, he encounters dirty, smelling noncompliant patients; but he discovers that sometimes their life stories make their behavior understandable.
This is relevant to Dr. Behrens' "expectations" of patients. The attitude persists in our own time apparently.
I once saw a Hamlet where the insane Ophelia was played not a pathetic, sad, wronged innocent. Instead she acted angry, erratic, "offensive," etc. It affected me powerfully. It took me back to a time when I worked in a shelter for people who were homeless. She reminded me of women I met there. Often they were unruly, uncooperative, not mention smelly. And every night I struggled to remember they were all human beings. I hope I managed to respond to that more often than hiding behind the exigencies of the job.
Reading the piece I wondered if this is too much to ask of Dr. Behrens. Or of our own?
You guys are great! Lurker here is appreciating all this info and feeling a bit bad not to contribute...
Traveller wrote: "You guys are great! Lurker here is appreciating all this info and feeling a bit bad not to contribute..."Just nice to know you are around, Traveller. Thanks for saying "hello."
I'm cheering you guys from the sidelines, Lily! Sadly don't have time at the moment to do research myself, but just wanted you guys to know that what you are posting is of value to others like myself. :)
Lily wrote: "So far, MM has seemed so male oriented for me. The women are not part of the intellectual conversations, or if they are, their role seems trivialized or mocked or silly. It is taking me back to the discipline of my reading pre-1960-'70's to be able to consistently (and as appropriate) read "human" where "man" is written, even though the translators seem to have done some smoothing. MM is a story told from a world predating the possibilities of an Angela Merkel, and I have a sense that is adding to my difficulties in reading it."Lily, I have been experiencing this, too. But, as both you and Wendel point out, this is a common experience for female readers, so I haven't bothered to mention it. I don't feel particularly invested in any of the characters yet, and I think this masculine quality of the work is the reason. So be it--the novel is still well worth reading, as I'm sure you agree. What I find more troubling is that women are so practiced at reading male-centric literature, whereas many men (present company excepted, perhaps) are reluctant or even refuse to read female-centric books. There are notable exceptions, of course, both in terms of books (Jane Austen's come to mind) and in terms of men (!). But certainly, when I think back to all the books we read in school growing up, the girls were trained to read books about boys as if they were universal. The boys were rarely, if ever, asked to read books about girls. Some of that attitude persists today, and I find it quite discouraging. I may have opened a can of worms here (I wonder if there is a German companion to that saying!), but there it is.
Kathy, I would say your points are well taken and well stated. I would add that the same thing has been the case for people of color.
"Lily wrote: "So far, MM has seemed so male oriented for me. The women are not part of the intellectual conversations, or if they are, their role seems trivialized or mocked or silly. It is taking m..."I hadn't thought about it, but you're quite right. But since this is Germany under Kaiser Wilhelm II, should we be surprised?
OTOH, HEad Nurse Mylendonk, while not involved in the intellectual side of the work, hardly seems trivialized or mocked or silly. She seems to me one of the most immediately presented characters -- by which I mean that when we see her in Thermometer, she is there as a presence right away, whereas some of the male characters seem developed only over time.
Everyman wrote: ""OTOH, Head Nurse Mylendonk, while not involved in the intellectual side of the work, hardly seems trivialized or mocked or silly. She seems to me one of the most immediately presented characters ..."I quite agree, Eman, and even thought about my comment after she was introduced -- I hadn't read about her yet when I wrote @59. Since she enters at what is has been a female role for sometime, nurse, albeit at an elevated responsibility, I decided not to modify or append, especially given Wendel's question that I might be looking too narrowly when something broader may be troubling at some yet subliminal level.
The one comment I will make tonight is that for so many years, I was so accustomed to reading "man" in the generic, such that I belittled the consciousness raising efforts around modifying language and ways of speaking. Then, sometime in the late 1970's or early 1980's, I was reading some literature (on job hunting) that was very parallel to what I had read in the late 1960's and early 1970's, but the language was different, and, by golly, surprise of surprises, it really did make a difference on how it felt to read it. I hadn't expected such. What I was trying to reflect earlier was experiencing some of that same "language feeling" (I still love the German "sprachgefelt") that I had watched transition in the 1970's. Yet, here the issues were not just language, although it felt as if it was language that alerted me that something was going on. In MM, we have women largely excluded from the intellectual processes and debates -- which, as you say, is not particularly surprising for Wiemar Germany.
I have some thoughts about what Kathy has written as well, but they are still too messy to articulate.
Came across this tonight. Am pondering if it is relevant to MM:“The real damage is done by those millions who want to 'survive.' The honest men who just want to be left in peace. Those who don’t want their little lives disturbed by anything bigger than themselves. Those with no sides and no causes. Those who won’t take measure of their own strength, for fear of antagonizing their own weakness. Those who don’t like to make waves—or enemies. Those for whom freedom, honour, truth, and principles are only literature. Those who live small, mate small, die small. It’s the reductionist approach to life: if you keep it small, you’ll keep it under control. If you don’t make any noise, the bogeyman won’t find you. But it’s all an illusion, because they die too, those people who roll up their spirits into tiny little balls so as to be safe. Safe?! From what? Life is always on the edge of death; narrow streets lead to the same place as wide avenues, and a little candle burns itself out just like a flaming torch does. I choose my own way to burn.” — Sophie Scholl
Oh, my, I just looked up her wiki entry. I had no idea of her bio.
I am tangled in the multiple threads we have going. In any case, this comment probably belongs here since it is not strictly related to MM.
On one of the threads Lily shared a very pertinent quotation from Sophie Scholl. And then she expressed surprise and astonishment when she looked Sophie Scholl up on wikipedia.
Quick summary for others: Sophie Scholl was a member of a German student group who in the waning days of WWII, when the war was clearly lost for the Nazis, distributed anti-Nazi pamphlets.
One point of relevance to MM is the reminder that it is at best an approximation to describe national stereotypes or characteristics. While there will usually be some validity to generalizations, nations are also collections of individuals.
Lily, and others, may be interested in an absolutely gripping film called The Final Days of Sophie Scholl. It raises complex moral questions and has haunted me ever since I saw it a few years ago. (An added "bonus" is footage of the actual trial of the students by the Nazi court.)
A second recommendation for anyone interested in the ways average citizens resist totalitarian governments is a novel titled Every Man Dies Alone by Hans Falada. Extraordinary if fifty pages too long.
On one of the threads Lily shared a very pertinent quotation from Sophie Scholl. And then she expressed surprise and astonishment when she looked Sophie Scholl up on wikipedia.
Quick summary for others: Sophie Scholl was a member of a German student group who in the waning days of WWII, when the war was clearly lost for the Nazis, distributed anti-Nazi pamphlets.
One point of relevance to MM is the reminder that it is at best an approximation to describe national stereotypes or characteristics. While there will usually be some validity to generalizations, nations are also collections of individuals.
Lily, and others, may be interested in an absolutely gripping film called The Final Days of Sophie Scholl. It raises complex moral questions and has haunted me ever since I saw it a few years ago. (An added "bonus" is footage of the actual trial of the students by the Nazi court.)
A second recommendation for anyone interested in the ways average citizens resist totalitarian governments is a novel titled Every Man Dies Alone by Hans Falada. Extraordinary if fifty pages too long.
Zeke wrote: "Kathy, I would say your points are well taken and well stated. I would add that the same thing has been the case for people of color."Absolutely. For example, I know of several African-American writers who have complained that their books get shelved in the "African-American" section of the bookstore instead of on the general shelves, as if only other African-Americans would be interested in reading them!
Zeke wrote: "...Sophie Scholl was a member of a German student group who in the waning days of WWII, when the war was clearly lost for the Nazis, distributed anti-Nazi pamphlets...."(The quotation immediately precedes your post.)
But not near enough to the end to save her life. Did the group realize the war was clearly lost? Are you saying they didn't act until they thought it would be safe to do so? (This was all a new story to me -- when I picked up the quotation I didn't even realize it necessarily related to WWII. I was doing something entirely other than MM. I rather figured others might know her story, from her name alone; then decided to let those who didn't have the same path of discovery as I had had. You've been kind enough to give them a hand, Zeke! In honesty, I haven't plumbed even her wiki entry.)
Other good background is the wiki entry on Hans Fallada. Readers here may particularly want to note the criticism attributed to Mann in the "Death and Legacy" section. (It is not clear whether the quotation cited is from Mann however; the source cited for it is Erik Larson's In the Garden of Beasts.)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Fal...
In so many ways, it was a lose-lose time with little possibility of win-win, as managers and politicians are attempted to be motivated to strive for today. Mann family biographies, just from the reviews, seem full of choices to be rued.
Zeke, thanks for calling our attention of Hans Fallada and his writing. Don't know if or when I might read Every Man Dies Alone; still useful to recognize more about it.
To clarify Lily. Sophie and her compatriots (and pretty much every one else) knew the was was going to be won by the Allies. Despite that they felt compelled to make their small, but extremely dangerous, stand for truth.
Since it really is not a spoiler to say they are captured, the events the follow add layers of moral complexity to the story. A Gestapo officer tries to assist Sophie (motive unclear) and she has a terribly difficult choice (another "Sophie's choice" to make.
I can't recommend this movie highly enough. If anyone watches it, I think discussion would be in keeping with themes this group ponders in MM.
Since it really is not a spoiler to say they are captured, the events the follow add layers of moral complexity to the story. A Gestapo officer tries to assist Sophie (motive unclear) and she has a terribly difficult choice (another "Sophie's choice" to make.
I can't recommend this movie highly enough. If anyone watches it, I think discussion would be in keeping with themes this group ponders in MM.
Lily wrote: "Came across this tonight. Am pondering if it is relevant to MM:“The real damage is done by those millions who want to 'survive.' The honest men who just want to be left in peace. Those who don’..."
Aside from the fact that I disagree with her -- IMO the world would be a lot better without the Hitlers and Stalins and Caesars who were very willing to make waves -- (and Milton also disagrees with her), if you take what she says applied to MM, HC seems pretty clearly someone she sees as one of the damaging people, though in what way isn't clear to me. He is content to lie in his lounge chair, eat five very enjoyable meals a day, and take his temperature four times a day (for seven minutes at a time, that pesky seven again), while his cousin is one of those who want to be out and doing and is frustrated by his enforced idleness.
Zeke wrote: "I can't recommend this movie highly enough. If anyone watches it, I think discussion would be in keeping with themes this group ponders in MM"
Our library actually has it. It's out at the moment, but I've requested it.
Lily wrote: "Came across this tonight. Am pondering if it is relevant to MM:“The real damage is done by those millions who want to 'survive.' The honest men who just want to be left in peace. Those who don’..."
Well, a problem of all times. Being a Stoic or an Epicurean? Plato had a two-fold approach: There are times to step back and be silent, there are times to come out and take action. (Best demonstrated in the Seventh Letter and the Apology.)
So I would say, the real evil is not necessarily not to take action, but even not to think about to take action, or, if you take action, not to think about which action. The unexamined life is not worth living: This was meant concerning the thoughts, especially.
Reminds me of that "serenity prayer." Quite profound, I think, despite how commonly it's quoted. Something to the effect of: God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference.
Have we posted this link of the present hotel based on the sanitarium of our novel:http://www.schatzalp.ch/p.cfm?s=2&...
Or this photo from Wiki:
From the side without the balconies, which can be seen in the back at the end of the building.
This shows the balcony side of the current hotel.
See Wendel's correcting comment @103.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/31583019/Th...This may be useful to some -- for the weeks of 4/17 to 4/30, Woods section name followed by page number in the Lowe-Porter online translation above:
Freedom 153
Mercury's Moods 156
Encyclopedia 163
Humaniora 174
Research 185
Danse Macabre 197
Walpurgis Night 221
I so like seeing the pictures. Thanks, Lily.
Lily wrote: "http://www.scribd.com/doc/31583019/Th...This may be useful to some -- for the weeks of 4/17 to 4/30, Woods section name followed by page number in the Lowe-Porter online ..."
Thanks! I can't get that Woods translation online very well, so this will be very useful to those reading that translation.
Can anyone recommend a translation of the Magic Mountain? I cannot read it with the group, but just for future reference.
I'm deeply engaged with the Lowe-Porter translation.
But I know that there are others who just as ardently prefer Woods.
But I know that there are others who just as ardently prefer Woods.
Adelle wrote: "I'm deeply engaged with the Lowe-Porter translation.But I know that there are others who just as ardently prefer Woods."
As far as we have determined, those are the only two complete translations to English in print. I happen to own the Woods translation because I bought the Everyman Library Edition. It is the more recent and so reflects some of the considerations about language that one would expect. But, I have followed parts of the online version of Lowe-Porter and have found neither consistently favored. If one has the time and energy, it is probably valuable to read multiple translations side-by-side so long as they are respected ones, as both of these seem to be.
Adelle wrote: "I'm deeply engaged with the Lowe-Porter translation.But I know that there are others who just as ardently prefer Woods."
When I read the work about fifteen years ago in an adult class led by a retired English prof, he recommended the Woods. But from the discussion here, the Lowe-Porter seems perfectly acceptable, too. There are enough snippets being quoted here from both texts that by the end of the discussion you have have a better sense of which author's style works best for you. But I don't think you'll lose either way.
In terms of translators, perhaps particularly insight on Lowe-Porter, I would suggest reading Michael Cunningham's comments in Look Inside here:http://www.amazon.com/Death-in-Venice...
Hmm....so is the Lowe-Porter translation to be viewed as "fusty Edwardian" take upon elements such as homosexuality...and perhaps a newer translation (such Heim's as reviewed for "Death in Venice" on Amazon) is more light and direct? Is that what is suggested/argued? The uncloaking of identities once the "Victorian veil" has been lifted? But of course, Magic Mountain was both printed and released post Edwardian/Victorian era...so perhaps I am not reading the review (that I think you are referencing) correctly, but it is interesting.
Sue wrote: "Hmm....so is the Lowe-Porter translation to be viewed as "fusty Edwardian" take upon elements such as homosexuality...and perhaps a newer translation (such Heim's as reviewed for "Death in Venice" ..."Sue, I don't know what is "correct", but you seem to be raising some of the same types of questions I did after reading Cunningham -- and given the biographies of both Cunningham and Mann, it seems to me it all adds some interesting twists to thinking about reading Mann and about translations. What makes a difference and what doesn't? When and where?
Has any one here had access to and used either of these companion books:Thomas Mann's The "Magic Mountain": A Casebook by Hans Rudolph Vaget
A Companion to Thomas Mann's Magic Mountain (Studies in German Literature, Linguistics and Culture) by Stephen D. Dowden
WorldCat didn't show me a copy of the second one in the U.S., but it sounds interesting from its description on Amazon.
Classics and the Western Canon
Books mentioned in this topic
The Secret Life of Genius: How 24 Great Men and Women Were Touched by Spiritual Worlds (other topics)A Companion to Thomas Mann's Magic Mountain (other topics)
Thomas Mann's The Magic Mountain: A Casebook (other topics)
Tintin in the New World (other topics)
Thomas Mann's The Magic Mountain: A Casebook (other topics)
More...
Authors mentioned in this topic
Christopher Clark (other topics)Sean McMeekin (other topics)
Sophie Scholl (other topics)
Heinrich von Kleist (other topics)
Hermann Kurzke (other topics)
Thanks, Lily. Once I get about two- thirds thru MM, I will check those out. Looking forward to it. ..."
Adelle, the hidden clip on Freud @43 is reasonably short and won't spoil rea..."
Ah! Ok, I'm there then.