" يمكن للمتعة والألم ان يكونا متشابهين كأختين "

لكل إنسان منا جزء من الحظ في العالم، فينا المحظوظ بالمال او بالعلم او بالصحة ولكن أكثرنا حظاً دائما هو المحظوظ بالصديق الجيد ، الصديق الجيد بمثابة مكاشف للروح يصادق روحك ويكاشفك بعيوبها مهما كانت حده الإختلاف بين روحيكم ، فكيف إذا كان هذا الصديق فيلسوف وعلي درب البحث عن الهدف مثلك تماما، بين نرسيس رجل الدين اللاهوتي و غولدموند محب الصعلكة والفنان البوهيمي تنشأ صداقة كلنا نطمح إليها .

تبدء الرواية بتعرف نرسيس أحد أساتذه الدير علي الطالب الجديد غولدموند ،نرسيس هذا الأستاذ المتفرد وأفضل من يستشف الروح من الوجه يتخذ غولدموند صديق له رغم فرق السن والإختلاف الظاهر بينهم، ثم تبدء الحياه تفرق بينهم فنرسيس يهب حياته للدير أما غولدموند فينطلق بحثاً في العالم عن هدف يلائمه بتحريض من نرسيس الذي خلصه من هدفه الوهمي المفروض عليه من والده، ثم تبدء الحياه ترسم خطوطها بينهم لتعمق إختلافاتهم ، الاول يصبح رئيس الدير والأخر يجد في الفن ضالته .

يتلخص الغرض من الرواية في ثنائية الروح والمادة وعلاقتها بالحقيقة الكليه، فالمادة لا تصلح سوي في التشكل والفناء ولا تقترب حتي من الحقيقة الكلية اما الروح فلا حدود لما يمكن أن تصل إليه، كذلك هي الفلسفة مبحثها مادي فتفني وتتجدد اما الفن فهو يخلد الاشخاص في منحوتات ولوحات اقرب ما تكون لما في روح المنحوت او المرسوم من حزن او سعادة .

You, the lucky one with golden dust in your hair who have not read this piece of idleness yet, rejoice! I dedicate this review to you, in memoriam of weeks of reading I have thrown to the monkeys to chew on. Let me explain straight off that I was going to give this two stars because there were a few good scenes or paragraphs here or there. BUT they ultimately were not that good so the final rating stands.
Firstly, the name is wrong. It also misleads a small reader-Eve. "Adventures of Goldmouth" would be more correct. Why? Because the other guy exists more in the background as a kind of an idea rather than this being a story of two guys and their stories.
What is it about? Shortly, Goldmouth starts out at a monastery and quickly becomes a wanderer. He walks about aimlessly and lusts after women. He has a lot of sex which is explained in as minimal a detail I have ever read in my entire life. So don't get your hopes up that you'll get to read something arousing!
Here is something I thought of in the beginning. In the beginning Goldmouth is at the monastery where Narcissus already resides and they become friends: If I keep reading (it was already boring in the beginning hence the "if") I hope I see them prancing on a meadow feeding each other grapes, although I have a feeling I'm gonna be reading one of those love stories where the other cries after the other and they'll never have each other.
Well, I was right about the never having each other part but boy, was I wrong about the gayness! I wish there had been gayness.
Anythingness!
At the beginning I thought I was reading futile chatter of two lovers but in actuality I was reading a very mundane babble of two friends which makes me yawn even wider as I type this.
So he goes off on his travels with his little head guiding him. It's so naive, I kept rolling my eyes so much I thought they would roll out of their sockets and on to the pages. Well, at least then the book would have some action! I think the book was meant for a much younger audience because there was nothing new in there for me, I've read seen heard it all before. Heck, I've done most of the stuff myself!
When he is present at a child birth I saw the first glimpse of something meaningful happening within the story development but also in the protagonist: a growth. That's when the story and his view of life got darker. Reality, as one would call it, kicked in the door and marched around like it owned the place and I'm glad. I love reality invading fiction and in this story it's the only thing that saved it.
There is one underlying theme under all the not-action, and that's mothers. I think Goldmouth is in a way searching for his mother and thus ends up in bed with a lot of women, as one does when searching for a mother...no, wait...But I think a lot of what he does in his life is ultimately because he lacked strong guidance in his early years. Add here some freudian banter.
Then there is actually a sentence about how he felt that lust was the only thing that could bring him warmth in his life. That's when I almost stopped reading.
Seriously, stating the obvious much?!
This is when the only interesting part of the book took place, in order to not give anything away, I'm just going to say that it took only a few pages and was over in a heart beat. After that all the blah blah about his feelings and ideas continued and I started to pull out my hair.
Quickly after came the second interesting part of the book which relates to actual historical events very strongly. This part was longer than the one before and had a profound impact on the protagonist altering his views on life slightly. This part was written in such a way I got interested to know what would become of our lost wanderer.
After this part my frustration with the protagonist and the story-telling became unbearable. I have written down: The naive, self-centered brat who can't use his brain that much to even imagine that some things happen despite of him.
That pretty much sums it up and after this point I just read to get it over with.
This book was a battle. More with myself as a reader, though, than the book itself. It really does raise the question: Why do I read this crap?

Ao terceiro livro acertei no Hesse. Não foi em cheio porque todo aquele mulherio a cair de quatro pelo Goldmund, só pela beleza, sem ele precisar de dizer nada, não me convenceu. Gostei, essencialmente, da história de amizade entre Narciso e Goldmund.


_____________
Prémio Nobel da Literatura 1946
Hermann Hesse nasceu na Alemanha em 2 de julho de 1877 e morreu na Suíça em 9 de agosto de 1962.

”Вие сте застрашени от удавяне в света на чувствата, ние — от задушаване в безвъздушното пространство. Ти си човек на изкуството, аз съм мислител.”

Всеки един Голдмунд (златоуст или златорък творец) е благословен и осъществен, ако е срещнал своя Нарцис. И всеки Нарцис (взрян в собственото си отражение самотен мислител) стига до своя идеал, само ако неговият Голдмунд е бил до него да поддържа топлината на огъня.

Това е роман за пътя. Не за единия Път, защото такъв няма. А за един от многото пътища, по които истинската ни същност и дарби биха били осъществени, въпреки лудостта на заобикалящия ни свят.

Цялата книга е диалог между двете крайности от спектъра с човешки качества и психологически профили. Голдмунд ги осмисля всичките, невъзвратимо тласнат от Нарцис по пътя на себепознаването и самоосъзнаването.

“Буден наричам човека, който с разум и съзнание познава себе си самия, своите най-интимни, безсъзнателни сили, подтици, слабости и умее да се съобразява с тях.”

Веднъж започнал да разбира кой и какъв е всъщност, единствената възможност за Голдмунд е търсенето и себеосъществяването. Из пътя го подмамват неизбродимите дълбини на човешкото, които никой никога не е успял да обхване нацяло, но съкровищата, заровени в тях, оформят цялата човешка култура, с играта на светлини и сенки от пещерата на Платон:

”Как тогава в здрача на зелената речна дълбочина за тръпнещи мигове проблясваше нещо неизразимо златно или сребърно, едно нищо, но все пак пълно с най-блажени обещания;... както фенерът, окачен под товарна кола в нощта, рисува по стените огромната въртяща се сянка на спиците на колелата, така в течение на минута тази игра на сенките може да бъде пълна със зрелища, събития и истории, както е пълен целият Вергилий.”

Концепцията на Фройд за Аз, То и Свръх-аз е преплетена във всяко красиво-поетично изречение на Хесе. Отгласите от Юнг, с когото Хесе се е познавал, също са ясно доловими.

Но Голдмунд е дете на сетивата, не на абстракциите, и по своя път в една често жестока средновековна Европа (сходна на тази от 30-40 те г. на 20-ти век) той се сблъсква с живите и конкретни проявления на всяка една логическа двойка, над която философи са разсъждавали от векове, извайвайки идеи:

If you have a penchant for poetic language, a love for new experiences, and a sensitivity to life's struggles, you will find hope and deep beauty in this story. I recommend finding a place of solitude and spiritual transcendence before delving into this as you will inevitably flip back to the beginning once finished and have to read it again.

“If I know what love is, it is because of you.

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.

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 that lasts longer than we do.

All existence seemed to be based on duality, on contrast. Either one was a man or one was a woman, either a wanderer or sedentary burgher, either a thinking person or a feeling person-no one could breathe in at the same time as he breathed out, be a man as well as a woman, experience freedom as well as order, combine instinct and mind. One always had to pay for one with the loss of the other, and one thing was always just as important and desirable as the other.

How mysterious this life was, how deep and muddy its waters ran, yet how clear and noble what emerged from them.”

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.

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.

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.

"يمكن للمتعة والألم أن يكونا متشابهين كأختين "

من اجمل الروايات اللي قرأتها السنة دي؛ صديقان مقربان رغم بعد المسافات يعرضان حالة مختلفة من القرب الروحاني، كل منهما يمثل مذهب فكري مختلف الروح والمادة الفكر والفن الايمان والكفر ، كل منهما يسعي لمعرفة ذاته الحقيقة، للراحة، لمنطقة الأمان النهائية بطريقته الخاصة، لكن هل يكفي أن نحيا بنمط واحد الحياة باكملها؟ هل نستطيع بلوغ نهاية الدرب باتخاذ الطريق المستقيم دائما؟ نرسيس وغولدموند هما رؤية واحدة للحياة ولكنها منقسمة، كصورة قُطعت لجزئين لا يمكن رؤيتها كاملة سوي بإعادة لصقهما معا مرة أخري.

One day, in the coffee corner,
met the artist and the thinker;
Over cappuccino started again,
the perennial debate, 'Who's greater?'

"Knowledge is life's sole goal,"
said the rationalist.
"Life but beauty darker than coal,"
argued the empiricist.

"O' My dearest friend,
your comprehension comes as a pity;
It's only with knowledge,
that one truly appreciates beauty."

"Beauty in itself is complete,
who needs knowledge to analyze?
And if you still can't get it,
I suggest, go fly a kite."

"Beauty is a mirage,
that withers with age,
Ah! the big fool you are,
fails to see 'Knowledge is Power'"

"Don't you know that 'Ignorance is Bliss',
What values more, a scepter or a kiss?
'A thing of beauty is joy for ever'
A blind like you can understand never"

The duel continues
between mind and heart,
And the soul smiles,
enjoying both reason and art.

kakva ljepota. kakav mir.

preporučujem svakome tko se bavi moralnim pitanjima, tko je u promišljanjima o Bogu, tko preispituje svoje životne odluke. svakome tko nije siguran "što Bog od nje/ga želi" i tko se pita "postupam li ispravno?" (iz religiozne i moralne perspektive).

pod utjecajem istočnjačkih religija (hesse je i sam proveo neko vrijeme i indiji što je ostavilo trajan trag u njegovim djelima), u ovoj pripovijetci suprotstavlja (ili, bolje rečeno, pomiruje) dvojicu sasvim različitih muškaraca čija veza počinje u samostanu: jedan je čovjek od vjere, znanosti i duhovnosti, a drugi od svijeta, lutanja, čulnosti i umjetnosti - a obojica su u potpunosti ljudi od vjere, ljudi od Boga. njihova je ljubav i međusobna privlačnost neporušiva i trajna... ljubav lišena seksualnosti (koja je prisutna u najfinijim naznakama dodira ili pogleda jer, ipak, duh i tijelo nerazdvojno su povezani), agape, ljubav bića koja su stvorena da se prate i različitostima nadopunjuju tijekom svojih životnih puteva.
knjiga za one koji su siti indoktrinirajućih i/li lažno moralnih tekstova, knjiga čija se glavna misao može svesti na jednostavno, a tako oslobađajuće: prihvatiti sebe: bilo da smo narcisi, bilo da smo zlatousti, svatko ima svoj životni put, ni manje ni više vrijedan ili važan od puta onog drugog - meni osobno trebalo je to ponovno si osvijestiti u ovom trenutku života.

قراءة ثانية - بالعربية هذه المرة - منذ عشر سنوات اقترح عليّ صديق أن أقرأ لهيرمان هسة وكانت هذه الرواية وكل رواياته التى أستطعت أن أعثر عليها ولم أندم قط ..
بداخل كل منا نرسيس وجولدموند .. بداخلنا نزعة حب الحياة والجنون أحياناً .. وبداخلنا أيضاً الورع والتقوى .. فهل ترجح كفة على الأخرى؟ وهل نمط حياة واحد كافٍ لتعرف طريقك في هذه الدنيا .. لتعرف طريقك إلى الله؟

كانت هذه -وأسئلة أخرى- محور هذه الرواية