tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32723577.post5275948368890714431..comments2023-10-03T17:37:08.845+02:00Comments on documents: Dr. Faustusvalterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00239129101855356246noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32723577.post-46558993032567794962008-01-01T06:10:00.000+01:002008-01-01T06:10:00.000+01:00hi. im just rereading that book. only now i do get...hi. im just rereading that book. only now i do get the full meaning of it, its very intertextual u know. tis great, might even be the best novel i know.<BR/><BR/>anyway, i dont agree with u on 2 points. u say:<BR/><BR/>"the idea that the ideology is the Devil's work - an impersonal force, a contagious madness, taking possession of the minds of the German middle class - I find a little too unconvincing."<BR/><BR/>well, i dont think mann explains nazism [or the "devil" for that matter] in such manner. tis rather about some symbolic pact one makes with oneself, in order to "free" himself of the "superego" - and several other "obstacles" to his developpement - in the process.<BR/><BR/>such pact is nonetheless a highly conscious one, has little to do with impersonal stuff, or with madness.<BR/><BR/>"Also, fascism was not merely atavistic: fascism had a more complex relationship to modernity than a purely negative one."<BR/><BR/>certainly: thats why tis so fascinating even after half a century, isnt it :) in a way, back then it was much more modern [post-modern actually] than communism.<BR/><BR/>but thats precisely the argument of mann [in faustus, and in zauberberg - naphta]: the "conservatory revolution" - that paradoxical term, true nonetheless.<BR/><BR/>adrians efforts are introduced as an extraordinary project, much more than blunt "atavism". same with the development of germanys cultural/political elite, in the 20s-30s.<BR/><BR/>[my 2 cents]Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com