First, I read Demian and, I enjoyed the content, but initially I found it to be a tricky read. I then reread the book while taking notes and was able to understand and enjoy it much better. I read Siddhartha next, and I again identified with certain themes and enjoyed the book but I still found it to be a little challenging and confusing towards the end. Then, I read Beneath the Wheel and enjoyed the book, without having trouble understanding it.

Today, I finished Steppenwolf confused. I could understand certain themes but by the end I was overwhelmed by the amount of information without completely understanding. Perhaps understanding a book like Steppenwolf, which Hesse wrote at around 50, would need more years and experience on the reader's part?

I have heard great things about Narcissus and Goldmund and The Glass Bead Game and was looking forward to reading them. However, the general consensus seems to be that Hesse's later works are more complex, while books like Demian and Siddhartha are easy to read. Since I did initially struggle with Demian, Siddhartha, and Steppenwolf, I'm not sure if going on to read those two books would be a good idea.

I have genuinely enjoyed what I have read of Hesse so far, but it's more difficult to enjoy when I'm not understanding the content. Any advice?

I have read Siddhartha in its original German, alongside with two English translations.

The translation by Joachim Neugroschel is amazing (published by Penguin Classics with ISBN 0142437182), it translates the meaning perfectly while retaining the meditative style of the original; the one by Hilda Rosner (published by Macmillan Collector's Library with ISBN 1529024048) is lacking the nicely structured and smoothly flowing sentences, and even contains mistranslations that mean the opposite of the German original. But granted, the one from Macmillan looks very pretty with its clothbound cover and gold-foiled edges.

Below are all the occasions where Rosner's translation is misleading; judge them for yourselves. Emphasis mine; Hesse didn't use any. Naturally, spoilers ahead. The German page numbers are from the Suhrkamp paperback (ISBN 3-518-36682-3).

Erster Teil, Gotama (S. 26)

In allen Wegen des herrlichen Haines wandelten Mönche im gelben Gewand, unter den Bäumensaßen sie hier und dort, in Betrachtung versenkt oder im geistlichen Gespräch, wie eine Stadt waren die schattigen Gärten zu sehen, voll von Menschen wimmelnd wie Bienen.

Rosner (p. 31)

Monks in yellow robes wandered along all the paths of the magnificent grove. Here and there they sat under the trees, lost in mediation or engaged in spirited talk. The shady gardens were like a town, swarming with bees.

Neugroschel (p. 26)

On all paths of the glorious grove, monks in yellow cloaks were walking; they sat here and there under the trees, absorbed in contemplation or in spiritual conversation; the shady gardens looked like a city, filled with people swarming like bees.

Zweiter Teil, Kamala (S. 41)

Schön war die Welt, wenn man sie so betrachtete, so ohne Suchen, so einfach, so kinderhaft. Schön war Mond und Gestirn, schön war Bach und Ufer, Wald und Fels, Ziege und Goldkäfer, Blume und Schmetterling. Schön und lieblich war es, so durch die Welt zu gehen, so kindlich, so erwacht, so dem Nahen aufgetan, so ohne Mißtrauen. Anders brannte die Sonne aufs Haupt, anders kühlte der Waldschatten, anders schmeckte Bach und Zisterne, anders Kürbis und Banane.

Rosner (p. 52)

The world was beautiful when looked at in this way - without any seeking, so simple, so childlike. The moon and the stars were beautiful, the brook, the shore, the forest and rock, the goat and the golden beetle, the flower and butterfly were beautiful. It was beautiful and pleasant to go through the world like that, so childlike, so awak-ened, so concerned with the immediate, without any distrust. Elsewhere the sun burned fiercely, elsewhere there was cool in the forest shade; elsewhere there were pumpkins and bananas.

Neugroschel (p. 43)

Beautiful was the world if you contemplated it like this, with no seeking, so simple, so childlike. Beautiful were moon and stars, beautiful were brook and bank, forest and rock, goat and rose beetle, flower and butterfly. It was beautiful and delightful to go through the world like this, so childlike, so awake, so open to what was near, so without distrust. The sun burned his head differently, the forest shade cooled him differently, brook and cistern tasted differently, as did pumpkin and banana.

Kamala (S. 45)

Vor der Stadt, bei einem schönen umzäumten Haine, begegnete dem Wandernden ein kleiner Troß von Dienern und Dienerinnen, …

Rosner (p. 58)

Outside the town, by a beautiful unfenced grove, the wanderer met a small train of men and women servants loaded with baskets.

Neugroschel (p. 48)

Outside the town, near a beautiful fenced grove, the wanderer encountered a small train of male and female servants loaded with baskets.

Am Flusse (S. 77)

»Du hast deinen Reichtum verloren?«

»Ich habe ihn verloren, oder er mich. Er ist mir abhanden gekommen.«

Rosner (p. 107)

‘Have you lost your riches?’

‘I have lost them, or they have lost me – I am not sure.’

Neugroschel (p. 83)

“You have lost your wealth?”

“I have lost it, or it has lost me. It has gone astray.”

Am Flusse (S. 77)

Und wie hätte er, in diesem Augenblick, in dieser herrlichen Stunde nach seinem wunderbaren Schlafe, durchdrungen von Om, irgend jemand und irgend etwas nicht lieben sollen!

Rosner (p. 107)

And at that moment, in that splendid hour, after his wonderful sleep, permeated with Om, how could he help but love someone and something.

Neugroschel (p. 83)

And how could he, in this moment, in this splendid hour after his wonderful sleep, permeated with the om, not love someone and something?!

Am Flusse (S. 79)

»Abwärts geht es mit dir!« sagte er zu sich selber und lachte dazu, und wie er es sagte, fiel sein Blick auf den Fluß, und auch den Fluß sah er abwärts gehen, immer abwärts wandern, und dabei singen und fröhlich sein.

Rosner (p. 109)

Things are going backwards with you, he said to himself and laughed, and as he said it, his glance lighted on the river, and he saw the river also flowing continually backwards, singing merrily.

Neugroschel (p. 84)

“Things are going downhill with you!” he said to himself and laughed, and as he said it, he looked at the river, and he saw the river also going downhill, always wandering downhill, and yet singing and remaining cheerful.

Am Flusse (S. 81)

War nicht dieser Vogel in ihm gestorben, hatte er nicht seinen Tod gefühlt?

Rosner (p. 113)

If this bird within him had died, would he have perished?

Neugroschel (p. 87)

Had this bird not died in him, had he not felt its death?

Fährmann (S. 85)

[…], und Siddhartha erzählte dem Fährmann seine Herkunft und sein Leben, wie er es heute, in jener Stunde der Verzweiflung, vor seinen Augen gesehen hatte.

Rosner (p. 120)

[…] and Siddhartha told him about his origin and his life and how he had seen him today after that hour of despair.

Neugroschel (p. 91)

Then, as the sun was about to go down, they settled at a tree trunk on the bank, and Siddhartha told the ferryman about his background, about his life, and how today, in that hour of despair, he had seen it pass before his eyes. 

My comment

Neither is perfect but Neugroschel's is still less bad. I would rather translate it as, “[…] and Siddhartha told the ferryman about his background and his life, how he saw it today, in that hour of despair, before his eyes.”

Der Fährmann (S. 94)

Zuweilen aber erhob er sich, trat an die Hüttentür und lauschte, ob der Knabe schlafe.

Rosner (p. 133)

From time to time, however, he rose, walked to the door of the hut and listened to hear if the boy were sleeping.

Neugroschel (p. 101)

Sometimes he stood up, walked to the door of the hut, and listened to see if the boy was asleep.

My comment

The distinction is very important here: "if the boy were sleeping" is a conditional statement, whereas in "if the boy was asleep" the "if" has the meaning of "whether" (which is Hesse's intention).

Der Sohn (S. 97)

Aber ist es nicht ein Irrtum von dir, zu meinen, daß du ihn nicht zwingest, nicht strafest?

Rosner (p. 138)

But is it not perhaps a mistake on your part not to be strict with him, not to punish him?

Neugroschel (p. 105)

But is it not a mistake on your part to believe that you never force him, never punish him?

Om (S. 104)

Anders sah er jetzt die Menschen an als früher, weniger klug, weniger stolz, dafür wärmer, dafür neugieriger, beteiligter. Wenn er Reisende der gewöhnlichen Art übersetzte, Kindermenschen, Geschäftsleute, Krieger, Weibervolk, so erschienen diese Leute ihm nicht fremd wie einst: er verstand sie, er verstand und teilte ihr nicht von Gedanken und Einsichten, sondern einzig von Trieben und Wünschen geleitetes Leben, er fühlte sich wie sie.

Rosner (p. 149)

He now regarded people in a different light from previously: not very clever, not very proud and therefore all the more warm, curious and sympathetic.

When he now took the usual kind of travellers across, businessmen, soldiers and women, they no longer seemed alien to him as they once did. He did not understand or share their thoughts and views, but he shared with them life's urges and desires.

Neugroschel (p. 113)

He now saw people in a different light, less cleverly, less proudly, but also more warmly, more curiously, more sympathetically. When he ferried normal travelers, child people, businessmen, warriors, women, they no longer seemed foreign to him. He understood them, he understood and shared their lives, which were led not by thoughts and insights, but solely by drives and wishes. And he felt like them.

Govinda (S. 115)

»Das hier«, sagte er spielend, »ist ein Stein, und er wird in einer bestimmten Zeit vielleicht Erde sein, und wird aus Erde Pflanze werden, oder Tier oder Mensch. Früher nun hätte ich gesagt: ›Dieser Stein ist bloß ein Stein, er ist wertlos, er gehört der Welt der Maja an; …‹«

Rosner (p. 165)

‘This,’ he said, handling it, ‘is a stone, and within a certain length of time it will perhaps be soil and from the soil it will become plant, or animal or man. Previously I should have said: This stone is just a stone; it has no value, it belongs to the world of Maya, ….’

Neugroschoel (p. 126)

“This here,” he said playfully, “is a stone, and perhaps at a certain time it will be soil and it will, from soil, become a plant, or an animal or a human being. Now earlier I would have said: ‘This stone is merely a stone, it is worthless, it belongs to the world of maya.’”

Govinda (S. 120)

[…] er sah alle diese Gestalten und Gesichter in tausend Beziehungen zueinander, jede der andern helfend, sie liebend, sie hassend, sie vernichtend, sie neu gebärend, jede war ein Sterbenwollen, ein leidenschaftlich schmerzliches Bekenntnis der Vergänglichkeit, und keine starb doch, jede verwandelte sich nur, wurde stets neu geboren, bekam stets ein neues Gesicht, ohne daß doch zwischen einem und dem anderen Gesicht Zeit gelegen wäre […]

Rosner (p. 172)

He saw all these forms and faces in a thousand relationships to each other, all helping each other, loving, hating and destroying each other and become newly born. Each one was mortal, a passionate, painful example of all that is transitory. Yet none of them died, they only changed, were always reborn, continually had a new face: only time stood between one face and another.

Neugroschel (p. 131)

[…] he saw all these shapes and faces in a thousand interrelations, each helping the others, loving them, hating them, destroying them, bearing them anew. Each was a desire to die, a passionately painful confession of ephemeralness, and yet none died, each was merely transformed, kept being reborn, kept receiving a new face, with no time between one face and the other […]

finished reading this book in just a day and a half.
I have no idea what I’ve gotten myself into. I decided to buy this book because of a game I played, only knowing it was going to be a young adult coming-of ageself discovery story, and I managed to get this book for just $3. But oh my god... the scene where Sinclair analyzes Demian’s face as he stares at the horse the moment he looks at the painting and calls it mother, devil, whore, the way Sinclair describes Eva's face, the words Eva said to Sinclair, and that final scene where he kisses Demian..

Have you ever read any works by Shuzo Oshimi? If not, you should definitely check them out. You’d probably like it. The books convey an incredibly similar tone. I feel like if Demian were a graphic novel, it would look exactly like his work.

There are many things I still don’t fully understand. But I believe that when something you read leaves you completely confused yet still gives you goosebumps, that is something truly grand and powerful.

This book is just so powerful. At first, I was planning to read crime and punishment next, but this book is so breathtaking that I had to put that plan on hold just to sit back, reflect, and really sit with my thoughts about it.

I am truly grateful for whatever led me to read this book, and I’m definitely planning to read more of Hermann’s works in the future.

the beautiful cover, for years I've seen it at the bookstore and now I'm finally reading it!! im really excited to see how it goes for me

I finished this recently and found it life changing in a number of aspects. I’m reading Hesse’s Demian now and I’m left thinking about a specific scene in Steppenwolf. Towards the end of the book when Hermine and Harry are at the ball, and she’s dressed as a man, the two of them both flirt with and dance with the women at the ball, all while still being in sync with each other. While dressed as a man she resembles, almost exactly, his childhood friend Herman for whom he had a love that it’s clear even he doesn’t understand. He describes himself and Hermine, and I’m paraphrasing, as hunting together. It’s this beautiful sequence that to me acts as a cipher for the rest of the book and his work at large. All of his work is attempting to have this moment. Past, future, man, woman, human and beast in one synchronized dance, attempting to feel something. It’s queer in the way I yearn to be, in an all encompassing way. A desire to be and understand everything.

What a book.

I have never related and sympathized with a character so...intensely. I've recently decided to step outside my comfort zone of only reading fantasy and sci-fi and I've started to read and listen to more novels not related to those genres and its been great. Are there any more novels I should pick up I'm thinking about reading Siddhartha next and ulysses by James Joyce.

(Second picture is how I was feeling during the preface of the novel lol)

Narcisse and goldmund is the only book I've read by hesse, I loved it so much I bought almost all of Hesse books, I picked up Siddhartha like a month ago and I ended up dropping it halfway through, I heard so much about this book but I didn't expect it to be so dull, and what's funny is that I'm also a religious guy who feels empty and I relate to Siddhartha, but the prose isn't as poetic as the former book and the events aren't hooking me...

Despite my perception of the novel as a dystopia, I'm persuaded that Joseph Knecht is a pattern of a real teacher, directing his pupils towards the light. The "three lives" continue the same idea. Joseph Knecht wasn't a vulnerable person, regardless of the circumstances he was offered, he decided to remain a real teacher and serve high values instead of sitting in the "ivory tower".

(Sorry for my notedly broken English, it isn't my mother tongue actually, so I frequently make shameful mistakes speaking it)

I read Demian for the first time this year (and I've reread it multiple times already because I love it so much). I plan on eventually reading some of his other works like Narcissus and Goldmund.

One thing I've noticed, though, is that I mainly read books from male authors: Rimbaud, Blake, Nietzsche, Murakami. I would really like to find female authors like Hesse because I think it is important and interesting to see another distinct view of life but in a similar spiritual, mystical, and existential sense.

Do you all have any recommendations of female authors who are similar to Hesse, and maybe more specifically who have written books similar to Demian.

So I read this book a long time ago. Don't remember much, so I read the wikipedia synopsis to get a refresher. It feels to me like the man/wolf dichotomy is mixing metaphors a bit. What is each side supposed to represent? Maybe I'm missing the point, because it seems like the book might be saying the dichotomy is false, which would explain why I don't get it.

IRL, I struggle with depression, and it has often felt like a kind of inner beast that wants to consume me. But apparently, things like jazz and free love are considered "wolfish" by Haller, whereas I feel that the ability to enjoy those things falls firmly on the human side of my personal dichotomy. So what's the deal?

Hey guys, I'm planning to reas one of these books next, so I'd love to have some company and why not become bookbuddies for life after that

To me, Harry in the early parts of the book seems far more respectable than the version of him in the later parts where he starts going to parties and whatnot. It feels like he has given up so much of his individualism in pursuit of approval from others, and, to me at least, his willingness to indulge in mindless hedonism and become a part of the mass is just outright repulsive and undignified. Thoughts? Or is this perhaps the common consensus? I always got the feeling that his choices were intended to be seen as correct but maybe I just lack media literacy?

Hey everyone. I wanted to ask if any of you have read Siddhartha by Hermann Hesse and Is a River Alive? I’d really love to hear your experiences and thoughts about them. I feel like they create a very unique experience.

Personally, I read Siddhartha first, and the way the river is described gave me some kind of answers — or maybe not exactly answers, but definitely new perspectives on how I perceive the flow of everything. As Heraclitus said: “Everything flows.”

Speaking personally again, I feel that my worldview as an agnostic — someone unable to find absolute truth in any religion — connects deeply with the idea that everything exists in a constant state of movement, like the flow of a river. I’m also deeply influenced by the ideas of sapolsky, especially his perspective on the absence of free will and how human behavior is shaped by biology, environment, and countless previous causes. Somehow, all of this connected inside me while reading Siddhartha. It calmed me and gave me a sense of wholeness and peace that I’ve been intensely searching for for as long as I can remember.

Now I’m reading is a river alive? , and I feel like I’m gaining so much from it as well. It feels as if I’m finding more pieces of the larger puzzle of life.

I would really love to hear your own experiences, opinions, and ideas.

Where to start with Herman Hesse works? Which books of his would you recommend? Is The Glass Bead Game a good start? I've been wanting to read it for a long time.

Narcissus and Goldmund, Demian, Steppenwolf and Gertrud. I also own a copy of Siddharta but a different edition

So, i bought a copy of Steppenwolf in my own language. And I thought I needed some advice because this is the first Hesse book I've ever read.

(Sorry for my broken english)

Highly recommend Madonna in a Fur Coat by Sabahattin Ali if you liked Steppenwolf. The dynamic between Raif and Maria is somewhat reminiscent of Harry and Hermine. Anybody here read this?

These are all the Milton Glaser covers except the far right middle and far right bottom. Milton Glaser is the artist that was famous for the "I (heart) NY" logo (and an awesome Bob Dylan poster). He also did a set of covers for Signet Classics Shakespeare.

In the top row middle is "Journey to the East" and so is the top row far right. Same book, different cover. Any one know why? Strangely, the bottom row middle is "Tales of Student Life" and it is the same as the top middle "Journey to the East." The "Student Life" hardcover (not pictured) matches the PB version shown. Strange. Any ideas?

Hello! I'm going to blurt a little bit about my problem, so this may be a bit long and confusing to read (I'm really sorry for any spelling mistakes, English is not my first language and, while I know there is an automatic translation option on reddit, I decided to write it like this).

I've been putting off this book that I ADORE for years. I started reading it around the age of fifteen, and I didn't go beyond the first two chapters. It's not that I didn't like it; in fact, I adored it! But I didn't have a habit for reading and I ended up quitting until I forgot what I had read and had to start over. Now, at twenty, I've deigned to finish it.

I love Hesse's way of writing and all the topics he presents, BUT there are many doubts that I had about Demian and I have tried to solve them anywhere! Explanatory websites, analysis videos, everything! And I don't quite understand how one comes to discover oneself. How do you know what your destiny is? How to get to that self? I don't get it! Sinclair makes a whole process throughout the book about dreams, about not repressing those branded as impure, for there is evil next to the good that defines us as individual human beings (you know, all about Abraxas). The stigma of Cain, that mark of which he speaks so much, it has to do with being recognized as an individual, right? To not follow the crowd, to search for our own dreams and not the ones of the others... But how does he know that those things he thinks are only his and not a product of outside constructs? Does what I'm asking make sense? I hope it can be understood, in some way (I have slept four hours and I'm not with all my strength present to explain myself perfectly).

The ending seemed to me the most rushed part of the story, although I have enjoyed the whole book. I understand that Hesse lived surrounded by war and it is something that marked writers of his time a lot to the point of adding it in their works, but I do not quite understand why Sinclair seems happy to participate in it. I also don't understand why it is there that he can abandon Demian as something external that guides him, that now he knows that he has him inside (I've read all of Hesse's inspiration in Jung, too). Is it the war itself that makes him get to this point? I don't quite understand...

I think that's all... I would love to learn more! Please, indulge me.

Gertrud was the first Hesse's book read by me. It really made me want to read Hesse's classic novels like Steppenwolf, Demian and Siddhartha. I felt that the author was influenced then by Goethe (espessialy by his sentimental novels, I guess).