The Man Without Qualities by R. Musil

[Klowey]

Just in the beginning but a couple of thoughts, questions, comments:

I'm simultaneously listening to The History Of World Literature (for the second time). I just finished topics on the literature of 'the enlightenment,' romanticism, and upcoming realism, then symbolism - so this is fresh in my mind. And I am wondering what Musil thought of these movements. They alternated between an emphasis on emotions/feelings/imagination vs. intellect/logic/science.

I am finding it slow reading because it is SO dense. Sometimes I read a chapter twice. It's beautifully written, the words are all perfect. I don't know how he wrote this, but it seems from the structure and unfinished sections that he reworked the manuscripts a lot. Each chapter is so rich with ideas to ponder, it's hard for me to digest quickly.

This is a book I will want to read more than once.

[[deleted user]]

Klowey wrote: "And I am wondering what Musil thought of these movements which, cycled through a preference for emotions/feelings vs. intellect/logic...."

Thanks for sharing your thoughts, Klowey! My understanding is that Musil was critic of both currents (logic vs. emotions) and that this work is an attempt at tracing a third way: «the other state». Hermann Broch also explored the same utopia of a "synthesis" of the two (mirrored in literature by the combination of novel and essay form), but reached a different concussion: his theory of "redemption", which involved the creation of a new set of values for the new times. Musil didn't believe in "values" – something which is investigated in great detail and from many different angles all through the novel – and so looks for alternatives.

Significant material for the novel started gathering on Musil's desk since at least 1921 if not earlier.

[Darren]

on a more simplistic level, I wonder if Musil saw the film "Metropolis" when it came out in 1927?
;o)

[[deleted user]]

Darren wrote: "I wonder if Musil saw the film "Metropolis" when it came out in 1927?"

He did write on cinema (cf. Precision and Soul: Essays and Addresses).

[[deleted user]]

§§162-181.

Twenty chapters in galley proof (1937-38)

§§162-167: Lindner. The moralist and his self-referential way of life vs the utopia of the Millenary Kingdom (§164); Peter «paradigmatic example of the man of the post-war age» (from Musil's notes).

§§168-171: Tasting the Millenary Kingdom. Lack of God as the modern way to God (mystics without God); faith as «presentment of a better knowledge»; love as the ultimate answer to the human quest for happiness.

§§172-178: Counterpoint. Worldly events break into the utopia; love as "the other state"; love as ecstasy; Ulrich's enquiry into the genesis and nature of emotions (influenced by the Gestaltpsychologie); on logic, intellect and spirit.

§§179-181: Ecstasy. On the relationship between reality, emotions and ecstasy; ecstasy as an alternative class of emotions and as an alternative way of experiencing life.

[Klowey]

Fed wrote: "Klowey wrote: "And I am wondering what Musil thought of these movements which, cycled through a preference for emotions/feelings vs. intellect/logic...."

Thanks for sharing your thoughts, Klowey! ..."

Excellent. Thank you for the reply.

And good to know about Broch's view. I would like to read The Sleepwalkers at some point.

[Klowey]

Darren wrote: "on a more simplistic level, I wonder if Musil saw the film "Metropolis" when it came out in 1927?
;o)"

That's a good question. The film does propose a meeting of heart and head.

[[deleted user]]

Klowey wrote: "The film does propose a meeting of heart and head."

Musil found some inspiration in the theories of Ludwig Klages, Of Cosmogonic Eros (1922) in particular, often referenced in the novel.

[Darren]

Fed wrote: "Darren wrote: "I wonder if Musil saw the film "Metropolis" when it came out in 1927?"

He did write on cinema (cf. Precision and Soul: Essays and Addresses)."

Thanks for that Fed - the most relevant essay on film seems to be "Towards a New Aesthetic", but Musil keeps it completely general and for examples defers to his friend Bela Balazs's "Visible Man" which I do not have sight of, but Balazs's "Theory of the Film" (surprisingly) doesn't seem to reference Metropolis at all

[[deleted user]]

Darren wrote: "...the most relevant essay on film seems to be ..."

Thank you, Darren! Could you get an overall picture of Musil's attitude towards cinema, by any chance? I vaguely remember reading he was hopeful for its future. He was more into tennis, though! Ha! Were you able to check Musil's essay «Cinema or Theater», perhaps?

[Darren]

the "Cinema or Theater" essay is v.short and almost entirely concerned with theatre - he seems to draw an equivalence between the underlying dramaturgy - which might have been true early in the century, but I would suggest that this view soon became obsolete as cinematic forms rapidly evolved/diverged

I got the impression that Musil saw early cinema as mainly just pandering to lowest common denominator, but as you say was hopeful that it could improve and did have some positive aspects (for example the thought-provoking/symbolic nature of showing inanimate objects in film), although overall he thought it could never reach the "heights" of literature as an art form.

[[deleted user]]

Darren wrote: "I got the impression that Musil saw early cinema as..."

Wonderful, Darren – thank you so much for sharing!

[Klowey]

Only in the early chapters, but there are already several references to Nietzsche. Now I can see why someone recommended reading him simultaneously.

Also, in §14, Urlich and Clarisse's questioning the direction of their lives does seem relevant today.

Youth has always rebelled, but I wonder about the parallels today.
The 1920s, 1960s, seemed like major periods of cultural rebellion.
Whereas during the years ~1980-2010 it appeared that young people tended to conform more to society's expectations. However, in the last 12-15 years it looks like the world is really falling apart. I see many young people very disillusioned not only because of corruption and moral bankruptcy, but because they can't make enough money to even survive.

Anyway, just some thoughts as I'm reading.

[Klowey]

It looks like Fed has left. 😞

Are others still reading?

[Sam]

I am still reading and a wee bit past chapter 100. I have not been posting thoughts since I haven't got a clear enough idea of what Musil's goal is from the pages I have read. The material is all rising action--just introduction and slowly paced development. There is little conclusive or resolving material to digest. If this were music, consider it as ever developing progression without a resolving chord. The writing fluctuates from concrete to abstract but far more absract and general than at the beginning as the prose tends toward a more philosophic style of writing. The prose is stylistically a lot like that of Henry James though the philosophic seems more to the point with Musil compared to the psychological with James. James style can be very frustrating and Musil's has not been yet but it has been tedious and requires patience. The sense of satire in this seems a major difference from James. I will finish the first volume and whether I continue at present will depend on my feelings at the time. Right now, I would see the novel more as a vehicle for academic study rather than general reading. It was worth the effort but I find it of less literary value today than in the 20th century.

[Darren]

oh dear - what happened to Fed?

[Klowey]

Sam wrote: "I am still reading and a wee bit past chapter 100. I have not been posting thoughts since I haven't got a clear enough idea of what Musil's goal is from the pages I have read. The material is all r..."

I think your description is accurate, from my own experience so far. I'm not quite as far along as you. Thanks for your feedback.

[Klowey]

Darren wrote: "oh dear - what happened to Fed?"

If anyone knows, please tell us. He was such a fabulous addition to the group. I still go back and read his earlier comments on the chapters.

[Darren]

like Klowey, I am not as far on (chapter 52, page 224) and agree with Sam

I will continue to read it in small chunks so as to give it full/proper attention, but suspect I will put it aside at some point without getting to page 725 :oO

[Klowey]

It's helpful to hear others' experiences and impressions. I think either in Fed's comments or wikipedia it's mentioned that it's a book of ideas, much as you both are describing it.

[Darya Silman]

Klowey wrote: "It looks like Fed has left. 😞

Are others still reading?"

Sorry for being inactive. I haven't started the book yet. However, I took the book from a library :(

[Darren]

I got as far as p320 before DNF-ing
so I'm out!

(it had some good bits/aspects, but overall wasn't finding it a sufficiently rewarding reading experience to continue)

[Klowey]

I'm on chapter 40, page 226 of 437 in Volume 1 and I am planning on finishing it.

I can understand DNF-ing it. It's an unusual book. I'm finding it more exhausting than enjoyable, so I've decided to read a chapter or two a day. But I'm interested in what he has to say. I might try a reread someday because I don't think I'm appreciating it the first time around.

I think the list of "supplementary" reading mentioned in the beginning of this thread is useful. I've read The World of Yesterday and The Magic Mountain, and am currently reading Fin-de-Siècle Vienna: Politics and Culture. I think reading some Nietzsche could be useful and I have Edge of Irony: Modernism in the Shadow of the Habsburg Empire on my to-read list. The Sleepwalkers and The Radetzky March were also suggested.

At some point I will want to read Volume 2, but maybe not until next year, unless others in the group want to include it. It's supposed to be a bit different and I'm curious.

[Sam]

Klowey wrote: "I'm on chapter 40, page 226 of 437 in Volume 1 and I am planning on finishing it.

I can understand DNF-ing it. It's an unusual book. I'm finding it more exhausting than enjoyable, so I've decided..."

I am where I was prior and have to admit I haven't read a word since, having had a lot of works to read in February. I shall return to the book now with an intent to finish the first voume by the end of March or shortly into April. That is where I will stop unless something in the remainder of the book prompts my contnuing. I look forward to commenting more since I feel I have put forth slight effort so far, but I find it difficult to comment on a work like this unless I feel I know what direction the author is taking it and so far I do not. I also feel I benefited from the earlier reads in anticipation, especially Törless and Huysmans' Against Nature which I found very enjoyable. I still have to read Ercolino's volume on the novel-essay.

Fed got ahead of us in his reading and put forth the most effort towards this read and I thank him for that.

[Klowey]

I agree with you completely.

And I am so sorry Fed left. I felt almost like he was our teacher.

[Klowey]

I'm going to take a month break from TMWOQ to finish some other buddy reads. Then I'll finish volume 1 of TMWOQ.

If anyone wants to discuss it more in the meantime, let me know.

[Sam]

I am still plugging away at chapter 113 but this is a novel I find I have little to write or think about as I go along and all of it would come after I finished or after a second read. There are various philosophical, psychological, historical parts that could be excerpted and commented upon, but I would feel inadequate doing so having still not gotten a sense of Musil's points behind his writing this. So I will continue through part one and finish this month at which time i will probably read some criticism and attempt to come to some conclusions.

[Sam]

I also want to read some Klages since his thoughts seem very pertinent to the novel.

[Klowey]

Sam wrote: "I also want to read some Klages since his thoughts seem very pertinent to the novel."

I just looked up Klages. That sounds like a good idea.

I just read up entries in wikipedia last night to give me an overview of Nietzsche and it seems N was reacting to a lot of controversial ideas in the 19th/20th century. Like democracy & working class and elites, the tension between the Apollonian and the Dionysian philosophical & literary trends, and how morality is determined. I think the was also trying to come to terms with ideas Schopenhauer proposed. And we can't forget Darwin's discovery. I wonder how much of the ideas in this book are addressing a lot of that.

I also did the The Magic Mountain buddy read that Fed was in. And now I think a lot of the dialogue and debates in that book similarly cover these topics. From wikipedia on MM:

"During his extended stay, Castorp meets a variety of characters, who represent a microcosm of pre-war Europe. These include Lodovico Settembrini (an Italian humanist and encyclopedist, a student of Giosuè Carducci); Leo Naphta, a Jewish Jesuit who favors communistic totalitarianism; Mynheer Peeperkorn, a dionysian Dutchman; and his romantic interest, Madame Clawdia Chauchat."

[Sam]

Klowey wrote: "Sam wrote: "I also want to read some Klages since his thoughts seem very pertinent to the novel."

I just looked up Klages. That sounds like a good idea.

I just read up entries in wikipedia last n..."

I agree with your points and finished the first volume of The Man Without Qualities but am having a devil of a time trying to write about it. Unlike Magjc Mountain, where the philosophical passages seem woven into the story, imn this read at this point in the novel, the philosophical seems separate from the story and seems to me to be more aphorisms written in abstract general prose, getting meaning more from individual reader`s interpretaion than shared opinion from concrete examples. Unfortuneately, that is not one of my preferred styles. So I am probably going to try a few more chapters to see how the later material is presented, but will drop the read if I feel I am just reading to finish. I will pick this up again when you are closer to where I am since I have other books to read this month.

[Klowey]

Yes I agree. It's very different from a traditional novel of any of the genres in history. And it's not even like a post-modern novel.

I can see why Fed and others were so strongly suggesting accompanying reading. I see it as a good source, along with other books, to get a sense of the time and the social and cultural challenges.