Magic Mountain: Worth Reading?

[Quark]

I enjoyed Thomas Mann's short stories enough that I decided to read a longer novel. What do people think? Is Magic Mountain worth reading?

And, are other people having as many problems italicicing and underlining as I am? I try to underline the titles of books and the button fails to have any effect. Also, spell check doesn't work here anymore. Are other people having these problems? It's like I'm in a black hole and the rules that normally govern this server are breaking down.

[chaplin]

I enjoyed Thomas Mann's short stories enough that I decided to read a longer novel. What do people think? Is Magic Mountain worth reading?


I would say only if you are a firm admirer of Mann, should you read The Magic Mountain. It was the first work of Mann's I had ever read, and thought it was good, well-written with occasionally compelling characters, but the pages and pages of tedious philosophy and polemicisms were too much for me to really like it a lot.

It is very long, and has little, physical action; instead there's lots of discussions between the patients in the sanitorium, expressing thoughts on humanism and aesthetics, as well as the nature and effect of love and death.

Mann has a real gift for language, but you can get that from reading "Death in Venice" or maybe Buddenbrooks, unless, as I said, you have really liked what you've read so far.

[Quark]

but the pages and pages of tedious philosophy and polemicisms were too much for me to really like it a lot.

It is very long, and has little, physical action; instead there's lots of discussions between the patients in the sanitorium, expressing thoughts on humanism and aesthetics, as well as the nature and effect of love and death.


Actually, I kind of like Mann's thoughts on art and humanity. The language can only be powerful if you have some sympathy with the ideas.

Oh, and I'm jealous of you're ability to use italics. Some day I will be able to as well. Some day...

[chaplin]

Actually, I kind of like Mann's thoughts on art and humanity. The language can only be powerful if you have some sympathy with the ideas.

I think they're well expressed and insightful, I just don't like them so prevalent in the medium of the novel.


Oh, and I'm jealous of you're ability to use italics. Some day I will be able to as well. Some day...

It's just Ctrl+I, it's all in the wrist, Ctrl+I.

[Quark]

I think they're well expressed and insightful, I just don't like them so prevalent in the medium of the novel.

What else would you have Mann express prevalently in the novel? He doesn't do characterization particularly well, and he has no knowledge of what a plot is. Really, what makes Mann worth the effort are the ideas.

[chaplin]

What else would you have Mann express prevalently in the novel? He doesn't do characterization particularly well, and he has no knowledge of what a plot is. Really, what makes Mann worth the effort are the ideas.

I guess you're right, that is what he's best at. I just feel that the "ideas" he injects can spoil art, at least in its purest (or dandiest) sense.

[Quark]

I just feel that the "ideas" he injects can spoil art, at least in its purest (or dandiest) sense.

Are you saying that Mann is overly intellectual, or that ideas in general ruin art?

[chaplin]

Are you saying that Mann is overly intellectual, or that ideas in general ruin art?

Good question. It does seem that Mann is almost too smart sometimes, maybe abstruse is a better word, but I think that ideas, meaning philosophies, ideologies, tendencies, are out of place in literature, or art. Obviously, many authors disagree with this, Mann being one, but, personally, I think that they belong in non-fiction.

[Quark]

I think that ideas, meaning philosophies, ideologies, tendencies, are out of place in literature, or art. Obviously, many authors disagree with this, Mann being one, but, personally, I think that they belong in non-fiction.

You're completely right to argue that ideologies should be non-fiction and philosophies should be in philosophy, but what seperates Mann from philosophers is his doubt and self-contradiction. In Death in Venice, it is both noble and dangerous to follow beauty. Art is both attractive and repulsive. The kinds of nuanced ideas that Mann has can't be put in straightforward non-fiction. Not only because its easier for the reader to understand that way, but also because Mann himself might not completely understand the ideas he expressing. Most likely, Mann has a deep feeling about the world which has no name, no corresponding symbol. He has to gradually unfold it to the reader and to himself through the story. In this sense, I think he's like a better Melville. Moby Dick and The Confidence Man are both philosophical novels, but doubt and self-contradiction pervade the books. Melville and Mann don't want to commit to a system that could be written in non-fiction. They want to share a particular amorphous feeling.

[chaplin]

You're completely right to argue that ideologies should be non-fiction and philosophies should be in philosophy, but what seperates Mann from philosophers is his doubt and self-contradiction. Most likely, Mann has a deep feeling about the world which has no name, no corresponding symbol. He has to gradually unfold it to the reader and to himself through the story. Melville and Mann don't want to commit to a system that could be written in non-fiction. They want to share a particular amorphous feeling.

When you put it like that I think I agree with you. Maybe what I meant is that "Death in Venice" does a better job and The Magic Mountain a poorer job of melding his philosophical and such ideas into a deeper, "amorphous" literary texture, than straight didactics.

Sorry, if I messed up your thread with all this discussion on things not specific to The Magic Mountain particularly.

[Quark]

No, I think I understand what you're saying now. You may be arguing that ideas take over the story when they're only supposed to be representing the amorphous world-view that Mann has. This can happen. I think Melville does this. In Moby Dick, Melville is trying to discuss typical literary concepts like man's relationship to nature, the will, and society, but the whaling and nautical metaphors that he uses take over the story. He loses all sense of proportion, and a compelling whaling eventure with an extreme human significance becomes an 800 page collage of Melville's intellectualism. Yes, this is certainly a poor way for a novel to turn out, but I don't think Mann does this.

Did any of that make sense?

[chaplin]

No, I think I understand what you're saying now. You may be arguing that ideas take over the story when they're only supposed to be representing the amorphous world-view that Mann has. This can happen. I think Melville does this. In Moby Dick, Melville is trying to discuss typical literary concepts like man's relationship to nature, the will, and society, but the whaling and nautical metaphors that he uses take over the story. He loses all sense of proportion, and a compelling whaling eventure with an extreme human significance becomes an 800 page collage of Melville's intellectualism. Yes, this is certainly a poor way for a novel to turn out, but I don't think Mann does this.

Did any of that make sense?

It does indeed. It definitely happens in both Moby Dick and The Magic Mountain, and both Mann and Melville failed and succeeded in breaking past the monotony, the spoiling effect of "ideas" clumping together instead of seamlessly dissolving into the story and characters.

In my opinion, "Death in Venice" succeeds quite brilliantly in this, probably because it was short, to the point. In The Magic Mountain Mann seems to occasionally be unable to resist dropping in clumps of his "ideas" without sewing them in to the broader, deeper tapestry he was trying to create, with said tapestry ultimately being left in rags by the end of the book.

[Quark]

It does indeed. It definitely happens in both Moby Dick and The Magic Mountain, and both Mann and Melville failed and succeeded in breaking past the monotony, the spoiling effect of "ideas" clumping together instead of seamlessly dissolving into the story and characters.

In my opinion, "Death in Venice" succeeds quite brilliantly in this, probably because it was short, to the point. In The Magic Mountain Mann seems to occasionally be unable to resist dropping in clumps of his "ideas" without sewing them in to the broader, deeper tapestry he was trying to create, with said tapestry ultimately being left in rags by the end of the book.

Okay, there's quite a lot I want to say about all that. Unfortunately, though, it's an hour past when I wanted to stay up tonight, and my mind is beginning to waver between consciousness and sleep. I will respond--in bulk--tomorrow.

Thanks for responding. That was actually the best discussion I've had so far on this forum. It's perfectly fine that you talked about things other than The Magic Mountain. I wanted the discussion to expand--if for no other reason, because I've only ready 40 pages of Magic Mountain.

[Quark]

It does indeed. It definitely happens in both Moby Dick and The Magic Mountain, and both Mann and Melville failed and succeeded in breaking past the monotony, the spoiling effect of "ideas" clumping together instead of seamlessly dissolving into the story and characters.

In my opinion, "Death in Venice" succeeds quite brilliantly in this, probably because it was short, to the point. In The Magic Mountain Mann seems to occasionally be unable to resist dropping in clumps of his "ideas" without sewing them in to the broader, deeper tapestry he was trying to create, with said tapestry ultimately being left in rags by the end of the book.

I thought I sensed something to disagree with here, but it actually sounds right. I don't think it will stop me from reading Magic Mountain, though. I actually thought Moby Dick was a good novel. It was just a little exhausting at times. If Magic Mountain has the same tiresome, slow middle that Moby Dick has, I'll read it anyway.