I'm totally blown away by the softly thoughtful writing of Hermann Hesse and would appreciate the opportunity to discuss this book with others who feel the same. I'm especially interested in classifying his philosophy and with his description of love. The words in quotations belong to Hesse, taken from the ending chapters of Demian. Between the quotes you will find my commentary and questions.
" Our circle also included believers, adherents of certain hopes and healing faiths. There were Buddhists who sought to convert Europe, a disciple of Tolstoi who preached nonresistance to evil, as well as other sects. We in the inner circle listened but accepted none of these teachings as anything but metaphors. We, who bore the mark, felt no anxiety about the shape the future was to take. All of these faiths and teachings seemed to us already dead and useless. The only duty and destiny we acknowledged was that each one of us should become so completely himself, so utterly faithful to the active seed which Nature planted within him, that in living out its growth he could be surprised by nothing unknown to come."
What exactly is the mark? I suppose it could be any mark where one felt an affinity. The book seems to imply the nobility of individualism within a spiritual realm. How do we classify Hermann Hesse philosophically? Is he a Pantheist, a Deist, or what? Obviously he is an existentialist, but, is that the only "ism" we will link to his name? Parts of the book remind me of Buddhism, for example, when Sinclair and Pistorius were about to discuss philosophy and instead, ended up just sitting in front of the fire for an hour or more. Sinclair was most content with the sitting and did not consider it time wasted, which reminded me of meditation. Not to mention that he also wrote Siddhartha, which I have not yet read yet. What shall we call Hesse?
Remember that Sinclair's ideal woman was actually the mother of his good childhood friend Max Demian, even though he did not see her actual face until his college days.
Her name is Frau Eva, and she tells Sinclair:
" You must not give way to desires which you don't believe in. I know what you desire. You should, however, either be capable of renouncing these desires or feel wholly justified in having them. Once you are able to make your request in such a way that you will be quite certain of its fulfillment, then the fulfillment will come. But at present you alternate between desire and renunciation and we are afraid all the time. All that must be over come. Let me tell you a story."
This would seem to be so true, there is no room for indeciveness within the realms of passion, they negate one another. I love the fact that Frau Eva is almost neutral in sex, although still basically feminine. It is interesting that Sinclair finds her boyish charm to be seductive in a spiritually, physical, out of reach kind of way. Do you also feel that Hesse is writing of himself when he writes from the view of Emil Sinclair, or do you think I'm taking creative liberties in that assumption?
"And she told me about a youth who had fallen in love with a planet. He stood by the sea, stretched out his arms and prayed to the planet, dreamed of it, and directed all his thoughts to it. But he knew, or felt he knew, that a star cannot be embraced by a human being. He considered it his fate to love a heavenly body without any hope of fulfillment and out of this insight he constructed an entire philosophy of renunciation and silent, faithful suffering that would improve and purify him. Yet all his dreams reached the planet. Once he stood again on the high cliff at night by the sea and gazed at the planet and burned with love for it. And at the height of his longing he leaped into the emptiness toward the planet, but at the instant of leaping "it's impossible" flashed once more through his mind. There he lay on the shore, shattered. He has not understood how to love. If at the instant of leaping he had had the strength of faith in the fulfillment of his love he would have soared into the heights and been united with the star."
That star is every dream real and imagine, realized or forgotten. It is a dream which seems to be out of reach, and therefore, many do not attempt defamation of gravity. I'm wondering where Hesse was within his own life when he wrote this book, between which marriage, or during which. The above paragraph deals heavily with having faith in ones own sense of self and the importance of following through in that quest.

"Another time she told me a different story, concerning a lover whose love was unrequited. He withdrew completely within himself, believing his love would consume him. The world became lost to him, he no longer noticed blue sky and green woods, he no longer heard the brook murmur; his ears had turned deaf to the notes of the harp: nothing mattered any more; he had become poor and wretched. Yet his love increased and he would rather have died or been ruined than renounce possessing this beautiful woman. Then he felt that his passion had consumed everything else within him and become so strong, so magnetic that the beautiful woman must follow. She came to him and he stood with outstretched arms ready to draw her to him. As she stood before him she was completely transformed and with awe he felt and saw that he had won back all he had previously lost. She stood before him, and surrendered herself to him and sky, forest and brook all came toward him in new and resplendent colors, belonged to him, and spoke to him in his own language. And instead of merely winning a woman he embraced the entire world and every star in heaven glowed within him and sparkled with joy in his soul. He had loved and found himself. But most people love to lose themselves." Hermann Hesse
Here we have the real clincher " He had loved and found himself. But most people love to lose themselves."
This line plays over and over in my head like a my favorite cut on the CD left on repeat. Agnostic as I claim at times, I'm reminded of the line in the broadway version of Les Mis, " To love another person is to see the face of God". Leaving the musical out of this, what does this mean, to love and find oneself instead of losing oneself? Does this mean that in the act of loving minus ego entrapments, one finds one's true self? Does it mean that a mirror develops when two are so close as this, with a desire to be honest above all else? What does it mean?

Thank you very much
Kiki

Hi Kiki...

Well, Kiki first off I must confess I've been studying Hesse for many years and Demian is one of my two favorite novels of his (The Glass Bead Game is the other.) In your posting you've touched on some of the book's principal themes and even after some eighty years scholars are still arguing. So with that said I'll give you some thoughts that occur to me as I read through your comments again.

You ask "What exactly is the mark?" As Hesse specifically indicates in the novel, the "mark" is borrowed from the Bible's Cain myth, and in fact Hesse had (thanks in large part to the influence of his parents) extensive familiarity with the Bible. This is reflected in the extensive use in this novel of Christian symbols. Yet, as you have already discovered, Buddhist elements are also present. Somewhat later in his life--but before he composed Demian--Hesse turned to the religions of the East and he eventually sought to incorporate into his own life the best of what humanity had to offer. This idea received fuller treatment later on in The Glass Bead Game.

Soo..hmm...what shall we call Hesse? Many literary types see Hesse as at best a second-rate author, yet people continue to read his works and feel moved by them, which suggests that he deserves better treatment. An excellent treatment of this topic can be found in Theodore Ziolkowski's book "The Novels of Hermann Hesse: A Study in Theme and Structure" which includes an insightful chapter in the end on Hesse's place in German literature.

Do I feel as if Hermann Hesse's and Emil Sinclair's perspectives are interchangeable? Absolutely. I think Hesse was an especially autobiographical writer and his work is at least in part an effort to know himself. One Hesse scholar (Joseph Mileck) accurately described Hesse's output as "confessional".

Hesse drafted this book during World War I after his first marriage had collapsed. By that time he had moved from southern Germany to Switzerland and spent most of the war doing work for German POWs. He had already experienced a psychological collapse and had undergone psychoanalysis, so much of the dreamy imagery here reflects that.

At the moment I'm having a little difficulty thinking of a good response to your last couple lines, so I'll have to contemplate them a while longer. But I think one of Demian's central messages is that the truly "enlightened" learn to really know themselves, however daunting the process may be, and avoid simply falling back into the complacency of the "masses", thus the line about finding oneself instead of losing oneself.

So, Kiki, that's my initial reaction to your comments. I'd be curious to read any other opinions. And Kiki, if you'd like some other insights post again and I can give you some additional pointers; the secondary literature for example on this book is quite substantial.

Keith Murray

Thank you very much Keith Murray, your opinions are most appreciated. It stands to reason that Hesse held a belief in God along with several other types of philosophy. I wonder if he abandoned the idea of God in "The Glass Bead Game", or if he returns to the theology of his childhood?
I have a few more quotes listed below, followed by more of my comments and questions.
Max, speaking to Sinclair:
" this is one of the very places that reveals the poverty of this religion most distinctly. The point is that this God of both Old and New Testaments is certainly an extraordinary figure but not what he purports to represent. He is all that is good, noble, fatherly, beautiful, elevated, sentimental - true! But the world consists of something else besides. And what is left over is ascribed to the devil, this entire slice of world, this entire half is suppressed and hushed up. In exactly the same way they praise God as the father of all life but simply refuse to say a word about our sexual life on which it's all based, describing it whenever possible as sinful, the work of the devil. I have no objection to worshiping this God Jehovah, far from it. But I mean we ought to consider everything sacred, the entire world, not merely this artificially separated half! Thus alongside the divine service we should also have a service for the devil. I feel that would be right. Otherwise you must create for yourself a God that contains the devil too in front of which you needn't close your eyes when the most natural things in the world take place."


The above passage implies a recognition of the improbability of reality being dualistic, which is a very eastern tradition of thought. Yet he clings still to some metaphors from Christian theology, such as the story of the Mark of Cain. I'm also reminded of Richard Bach, especially in his novel "One", in which a spirituality is suggested without a particular vehicle to drive it home. What is it that connects these two books?
Furthermore, Max goes on to say, " We talk too much,"...."Clever talk is absolutely worthless. All you do in the process is lose yourself. And to lose yourself is a sin. One has to be able to crawl completely inside oneself, like a tortoise."
Again, there is mixed imagery here, a conflict between Christian thought and something I'll label eastern for now. The word "sin" certainly isn't Buddhist, yet, it might go more in keeping with Hinduism. The idea that expaining ideas loses something, reminds me of both Kierkegaard and Buddhism. Sinclair then states, in regards to Max:
"I trembled at the sight. Dead, I thought, almost saying it aloud. My spellbound eyes were fixed on his face, on this pale stone mask,, and I felt: this is the real Demian. When he walked beside me or talked to me- that was only half of him, someone who periodically plays a role, adapts himself, who out of sheer compaission does as the others do. The real Demian, however, looked like this, as primeval, animal, marble, beautiful and cold, dead yet secretly filled with fabulous life. And around him this quiet emptiness, this ether, interstellar space, this lonely death!"
"Now he has gone completely into himself, I felt, and I trembled. Never had I been so alone. I had no part in him: he was inaccessible, he was more remote from me than if he had been on the most distant island in the world."
Is the state in which Max is described above not unlike the meditative state practiced in many eastern religions? Is Hesse suggesting that the true self has no interaction with the outside world, that all interactions are "polite" role play?
Again the contrast, for I find no philosophy that I am familiar with that combines these elements in exactly these same ways, which would also point towards his hold on individualism.
This time, it is Pistorius, the philosophical, passionate musician who speaks,"...live those dreams, play with them, build altars to them. It is not yet the ideal but it points in the right direction. Whether you and I and a few others will renew the world someday remains to be seen. But within ourselves we must renew it each day, otherwise we just aren't serious. Don't forget that ! You are eighteen years old, Sinclair, you don't go running to prostitutes. you must have dreams of love, you must have desires. Perhaps you're made in such a way that you are afraid of them. Don't be. They are the best things you have. ....You aren't allowed to be afraid of anything, you can't consider prohibited anything that the soul desires."


Here we go again. The soul, is what exactly?It must be that inner tortoise animal which Hesse seems to feel is immortal. Faith in one's own inner self, and the courage to listen and follow that voice is emphasized once again, although he still holds on to ideas such as a separately existing "soul". In this way, dreams become concepts, which seem remotely removed from Buddhist philosophy. The more I think of it, the more Hesse seems like a hodge podge of this and that; a patch work quilt sewn together with his own life. He finally renounces Pistorius, when he recognizes that Pistorius is basically only retelling tales from the past, even though they come in books as big as the Old and New Testament. He was not on his own in terms of thinking, he was unable to leave the infertile field of his fathers design. At that point, Sinclair parted ways philosophically with Pistorius.
It is also interesting how he is always drawn back to Max throughout the book. Perhaps Max is an ideal he wished to achieve within himself. The components of Max he saw in his mother melted the duality between the sexes. Indeed he felt at home within her house and garden. Perhaps max Demian is his true self.
I apologized for the length of this post. I had no idea what I would write as I sat down to write, however, this all seemed relevant. Again, I would appreciate any comments.
Thank
you,
Kiki

Kiki,

Well, your questions can almost be compared to "What's the meaning of life?"

Hesse spent his whole life 'answering the call'. And so it is very difficult to take a quote from him and give perspective to it. It really is...

How many licks does it take to get to the center of the lollipop? Every person has to find out for his or herself.

But while you're trying to find out, don't forget that candy is good -lollipop is good.

Warm regards,
Duke

Hi Kiki. I' ve read all your questions and ideas about demian and i am amused with your knowledge, i thought a lot about demian, actually he "brought me across". No matter, i have an advice for you: your answers don't lay in some book or on the net. You know where you should gaze long enough...and don't let your tool became your goal. thanks!

there are many different oppinions about Demian, but i never had an idea what he said to Cromer after what Cromer avoided Sinclair. Does anyone have some idea?

It is amazing what a month in time can do to a priority. The emphasis is still there, but Demian is no longer the object of my curiosity. I've left Hermann Hesse for a while, and have been reading Richard Bach, and also the Cosmic Consciousness book by Richard Bucke. Life is like a lollipop, sometimes I think I shouldn't lick too much of it, but the stay from the sweets only makes me want it more when next I return.
Thank you Duke, and Nemanja for participating in my Hesse infatuation. Nemanja, I do not recall the part in the book to which you are referring. Perhaps a quote would remind me.

Hi Kiki,

I've read your questions and with greatest interest the citation you make about Tolstoyans and the like. Do you know that Hesse is describing in this passage the spritual commune of Monnte Verit¦ in Switzerland where he found his guru Gusto Graser? Read 'Mountain of Truth' by Martin Green and you will find the real scene behind the novel. So much for now. For more information contact me:
Gustomueller@web.de

or see: www.gusto-graeser.de.vu

thank you

I don't read or speak German.

Dear Kiki,
The mark mentioned I believe to be a quasi-real one, as such distinctions are common, yet unspoken in reality. The little child that no one will play with, the outcast. Often, it is a mark of intelligence, as Demain reveals.
Personally, I have always seen Hesse writing himself into the part of Emil Sinclair. This is the only character that he goes to the trouble to build up over the course of the book; he doesn't bother to develop fully Frau Eva or Demain. He also makes all sorts of statements, very personal statements, that I believe corresponded to himself. "Quite frequently I considered myself a genius, just as often, crazy."
I don't think he was a pantheist, that is a literal interpretation of Abraxas. I think that he was actually Atheist, and that Abraxas was simply a metaphor for the realm of the world and reality. This is my interpretation of it, at least.
I have found that Hesse's views change over the years, perhaps as he discovered new ideas and progressed further in his own self discovery. But one word of warning, do not read Siddhartha right after Demian, as I did, and I was sadly disappointed. But it is interesting to see the way Hesse shapes his novels upon his changing life, and the transition through them.
I'd like to bring up a new point here: Do you think that Demain and Frau Eva were real or just figments of Sinclair's imagination? I have discussed this at length with a friend, and we are undecided so far. I would enjoy someone else's input.
I too, think that Hesse deserves much more credit than he has been given, especially for Demian. It seems strange that my favorite of his works goes so ignored. This book literally changed my life. In a time where I needed it, it found me. I credit two things for my present day state of sanity, one is Demian, and the other is a friend who took on some strangely Demain-like characteristics in my life.
It's always nice to hear that other people enjoyed this book as much as I did. I look forward to any comments.
Eileen

Hi Eileen,

Demian and The Glass Bead Game are two of my favorite novels, both from Hesse and overall. I wanted to respond specifically to your question whether "Demian and Frau Eva were real".
This is a question which has long engaged scholars and critics. One of Hesse's best known researchers, Ralph Freedman, wrote a book some time ago which defined a genre of fiction he called the "lyrical novel." In such novels--and for his study he used the works of Hesse, Virginia Woolf, and Andre Gide--he argues that their authors extended some characteristics of the lyrical poem to fictional prose. In this type of fiction the central character is shown to reconcile his/her internal conflicts by projecting them outside of himself/herself. Characters in such novels are therefore really projections of corresponding aspects of the central character's self.
In this sense, then, Emil Sinclair is almost the only "real" character in the whole novel, or at least he is "more real" than any of the others. The others--Kromer, Pistorius, Max Demian, etc.--are simply different stages of Sinclair's maturation.

Sorry, forget to append my name there. Keith Murray.

i have always been curious about Hesse's use of androgenous love interests. i have only read Siddartha, Demian, and Steppenwolf but all three share the bisexual connotation. is anyone able to shed light?

In my opinion Hermann Hesse is just a person like you and me. Not an "ism", but a searcher for truth and spiritual growth. I think anyone who is, in this Michael area, honest enough to search above convictions like for example: You can either go to heaven or to hell, God don't exist etc, is an mysticus of today just like Hesse was.

Hello Eileen,
I should check this message board more frequently, thank you for your thoughtful post. It is of my opinion that Frau Eva is an idealistic vision and not a real woman. I agree that Sinclair very much resembles Hesse.

As much as he speaks of God, I think Hesse is probably Atheist also. This is further developed in Narcissus and Goldmund, which actually begins in a monastery, but takes on other directions in the course of the novel.

I just finished Narcissus and Goldmund. It was published five years after Demian, and goes into the differences that make up the intellectual and the artist. It is a very romantic and passionate work, much more sexy than Demian, but also laced with philosophy and a quiet knowing that comes very close to being Buddhist without really being that at all. I don't have the need to pick Narcissus and Goldmund to pieces, like I did with Demian.

I don't want to know the philosophy behind it so much anymore, the book is a work of art. I feel that I understand it on a level that I'm not going to mess up with words.

If you liked Demian, if you have ever had anything to do with the world of art, if you have ever had a tension between the physical and the spiritual realms, then you should treat yourself to Narcissus and Goldmund. It is the best book I've ever read. If however, I'd read this ten years ago, I don't think it would have had the impact on me that it now has. I doubt that a child could fully understand the richness of this lovely book.

If you give me your e-mail-adress I can send you some texts in English.

All the best!
Hermann

thank you very much

tfiebiger1@home.com

kiki,dont¹take life so seiriously,he did¹nt know the trought,anyway,he just was an uperminder,theres¹a tape him talking to I do not remember ho,where upon all he said that all he wrote was just fiction, I dont beleave what he said in that interview,I think he was,anyway a wolf

Hi is it cool to read Demian after Siddharta which I'm reading now.
I've only read Steppenwolf before now and that was fifteen years ago.......

Could someone give this ignorant novice a suggested reading order (with reasons ) for hesse's major works.

Thanks

what if one is a really thick, dull dense , unenlightened individual - is it still best to crawl inside ones own tortoiseshell/???

I read Narcissus and Goldmund a couple of months after Demian. It was perfect timing for me.

to the person who suggested I not take this so seriously, I quite agree.

If one wanted to be a tortoise I presume one could withdraw into one's shell. But even tortoises are inherently smart enough to stick out their heads every once in a while, move a few feet, look around in the world, at least to find a tortoise delicacy to eat before going off to take their next nap and, if fortunate, dream about their experiences.

Regarding the post on reading order: personally I would recommend reading Demian before Siddhartha, as in general it may be best to read Hesse's books in chronological order. Hesse's books reflect his personal growth. You will notice that the endings of his earlier books are rather indeterminate, if not disappointing. Think of Hermann Heilner in "Beneath the Wheel" who goes on to a wonderful new life as an artist of which little becomes known, a wishful phantasy of Hesse's at the time he wrote the book. Think of the somewhat hopeful statement of Harry Haller at the end of "Steppenwolf" that sometime in the future he will learn to smile and not take himself so seriously any more. Hesse kept working at the solution as he inched closer to an answer, each book at a time. By all means read "Demian" before Siddhartha. You will find that the complexity and symbolism of "Demian" and its contemporary themes and style are mellowed in "Siddhartha" to bring out a clearer, more straightforward message. And see how dramatic the relapse is in "Guest at the Spa", "Steppenwolf", The "Cisis" poems. Hesse was reaching out in "Siddhartha", only to slide back down the mountain of gravel that he had been trying to climb. To realize Hesse's struggles brings one that much closer to fully appreciating his work and its significance.

i do not write so much english but i tell you that demian is the best book that i read it is very important for the tem and now i am more carefull about the religion .
i would want know to demian he is mi platonic love.

libia from peru

In response to the tortoise shell comments, I just became familiar with the works of Noguchi. His father said that art is a flower than blooms in solitude. Agreeing with that approach, I would say enlightened people ( whoever they are) spend a good deal of time inside of their shell. Of course, the shell is an illusion, from which it is necessary to poke one's head out from time to time in order to maintain life.
As for reading order,
I believe that I will ask for a copy of Siddartha and also Steppenwolf for Christmas presents, as my family celebrates that tradition even though I am not a Christian. I agree that it is best to read all works chronologically, although I think any order of reading could be enjoyable.
I'm sorry it has been so long since my last post here.
Hesse is still my favorite author.

I have read Demian and the most confusing aspect to me was the kiss at the end. the part where he kisses demian. what do you all think it means? also the picture he draws, i think it is of an egg or a bird, something like that. what do you think that means? i never thought that demian or his mother were not real. i dont know i would have to read it again to see. but that book really affected me iin the most important way i think, the way that is truly subconscience and in a way i have not been aware of. i think that book is my favorite do far. it was the first one i read of his. i have only read that one siddartha and steppenwolf so far. i loved the other two i read as well. but demian was just special to me for some reason, i dont know. anyway, tell me what you think the meaning of those two things is, and maybe further comment about demiain and his mother being unreal. thanx.

The people in "Demian" are important figures in the book and in that sense "real". One could think, however, that Emil Sinclair took real figures and made them into something they were not. Just think of your own experience: did you ever meet someone and idolize this person, bestowing all your wishes, hopes, and dreams upon this (perfectly innocent) individual, only to discover later that he or she fell very short of your high hopes and expectations. You had made him or her into something they were not, actually a great injustice to the real person, and in the worst case you might have vented your disappointment on them, just so you ddid not have to blame yourself for your own mistake. Max Demian became for Emil the ideal of a person who was "all together". Emil longed to be like him. After an arduous struggle throughout the book, Emil came close to meeting this challenge of coming to terms with his own life, his nature, his experiences, and being "on top of it" and managing his own life and conflicts well like Max Demian apparently had done. He became - as it were - that which he had always dreamed of, a "Max Demian" himself. The kiss at the end is just a symbol. The ideal, imagined figure merged with the real figure and became one with it. As Max put it: Emil does not need him anymore. It is very likely that the person who realized that he was being idolized by Emil Sinclair congratulated Emil for having "found himself" and withdrew gracefully, figuratively speaking. One must admit, Hesse acquitted himself rather well of the challenge of incorporating this in the story line of his book, even at the surface.

A human being consists of a number of parts; at a simplistic level at least a head, a heart and a body. Hesse, like the majority of people who frequent this forum was a head type, ie. their egos are based or built around their intellects. Hesse came to realize the limitations and problems arising from such a psychological setup (no pun intended) and tried to do something about it, in his own personal way of course. Hence his interest in Jung, Buddhism, the Tao etc. When a head type actually loves he or she is activating or accessing the emotional part of their psyche which is usually repressed into their unconscious by their ego. By accessing the unconscious they are at least moving a bit closer to "God", if we wish to use religious terminology. The question is; To what extent did Hesse actually practice what he wrote about or was he like Wolfgang Pauli who loved to discuss such matters with Jung but refused to enter into analysis when Jung gave him the opportunity?

Da mein Englisch sehr bescheiden ist, werde ich in Deutsch antworten: Ihre Beobachtung ist v›llig richtig. Die Gestalten in Siddhartha, Unterm Rad, Demian, Narziã und Goldmund (und anderen Werken Hesses) sind androgyn. Das híngt mit Hesses fréher Biographie zusammen, denn die erste Liebe seines Lebens galt einem Mitschéler im Internat in Maulbronn. Hesse schreibt als erwachsener Mann daréber: "Es war die gr›ãte Liebe meines Lebens". Es drehte sich dabei wohlgemerkt um ein Geféhl, nicht um Sexualitít. Da diese Verbindung zu dem Schulkameraden erzwungenermaãen beendet wurde (Hesse hat darunter sehr gelitten), wurde dieser Lebensbruch zu einem der bestimmenden Faktoren in Hesses Schreiben. Diese "Liebesbeziehung" findet sich in den meisten Werken Hesses nur oberflíchlich verschlésselt wieder. Ein deutscher Germanist hat deswegen zu Recht festgestellt, daã dieselbe Obsession sowohl Hesse als auch Thomas Mann beim Schreiben angetrieben hat. Interessant ist auch die Reaktion von Andrà Gide auf die Lektére von "Demian". Unébersehbar ist in vielen Werken Hesses eine unterschwellige Homoerotik, die hoch literarisiert wird.

Hi, I had been to Tate Britain to see paintings by The Pre-Raphaelites, I did see Beatrice by Dante Gabriel Rossetti.
Then awhile later I walked in this second-hand bookstore and I saw this book with a picture of a bird coming out of an egg on the cover that I could not resist, it was Demian. I read the book and one time there is a painting mentioned of a woman in light and it became clear to me it was Beatrice from Rossetti. The story of Demian was fascinating to me and I read it a few times since and I feel happy to have found this book. Muchos saludos.

I was so happy to discover this discussion about Demian. I, too, was deeply moved by the book. It was the first of Hesse's for me. Wow--I accosted everyone I knew afterward with the beautiful, moving quotes that I scribbled down in my journal while reading the novel. Hesse is somehow able to put intelligently and succinctly the ramblings that I hear in my head all the time yet find difficult to articulate. I also read Narcissus and Goldmund immediately afterward and found the two main characters to very poetically express two essential parts of human nature--intellect vs. passion/life as art. The intoxicating perfection of nature, the basic joy of being alive that Goldmund felt, coupled with his frustration at the trappings of "realistic' and "respectable" lifestyles struck me to the core. It's all so simple, yet we make it incredibly complex! I, too, feel little need to analyze this book, as someone wrote earlier in this discussion. I just have to think about it and I feel a flutter, a glow, a buzz at my core--it's hard to explain. It makes me feel gIddy at life, but also calm and glad that another human being (who has been dead for 60 years) was able to transmit all this in his writing. It was a feeling, and he made it words, and now it's a feeling again in me and many others who have read and love his work.

HESSE WAS VERY INFLUENSED BY NIETZSCHE, DOES ANY BODY WANTS TO TAKLK ABOUT THIS?

WELL, I ADVICE YOU TO READ GERTRUDDE, TIS IS AN EXCELLENT BOOK

Demian is a 'bildungsroman' (spelling?), a coming of age story like the 'Sorrows of Young Werther', 'A Catcher in the Rye', etc. Young adulthood is when we search for our identity, look for role models, and when we are at our most receptive. This book was rocket fuel to my psyche and turned me on the occult. It has some of the themes of 'Crime and Punishment', eg the idea of man as superman, but it doesn't cop out. The idea of being a superman is not necessarily a power trip. The message of the Bible was perverted by authorities into a slave religion. The true message is we are gods, meaning we have extraordinary powers. The rest of Hesse I can take or leave. Books also enjoyed 'The Devil's Elixir' ETA Hoffman, Felix Krull by Thomas Mann, 'Jurgen' by James Branch Cabell.

Hermann Hesse probably had his feet off the ground when he wrote this book, What do you think?

Well, the point of the book appears to me to be how one gets his feet back on the ground.

Our book club just read and discussed Demian for the 2nd time after 30 years of our 1st encounter with it. We were, of course, confused and overwhelmed by it. In trying to understand it I came accross your site. This is my attempt to organize my thoughts and reach a coherent interpretation which may evolve further from this discussion page.
In my opinion, all characters are symbols of human aspects and part of Sinclair¹s maturing process. Kromer, evil, corruption; Demian, intellect, ego; Pistorius, unsuccesful spiritual search; Knauer, religious fanatism; Eva, nature, love (I thinks here lies his concept of God. She symbolizes man and woman, motherly and passionate love because the godly encompasses all. All other gods are created by man, as he tells Knauer in chapter 7.)
After going through all the phases that lead to self knowledge and realization, in a life or death moment, Sinclair receives a kiss from Demian/Eva -or the fusion of intellect and nature- when he is fully ready to face life¹s many adversities. This is especially true in Hesse¹s personal life.
In conclusion, Demian is an ode to the true essence and innate talents of the individual. Our God is within, we just have to tap it -an oriental concept.
As to the Demian/Devil relationship, the only thing that I can think of is that official religions for ther own interests have created a devil of our natural human desires.

Many want to give Hesse a religious or philosophical label: I think the man would smile at such attempts. One parallel not mentioned in the posted comments is that which is evident between the first two books of St. Augustine's CONFESSIONS and the first two-three chapters of Hesse's DEMIAN. Look it up, Gonzalo T. Palacios, Ph.D.