[Relsenlilky]

Thanks, Sybarite, for the thorough appraisal of Thomas Mann. It is hard to imagine what it must have been like for a middle-class German like Mann, who wrote books and never did anyone any harm, suddenly realising (you suggest in the 1920s already), that his country was being taken over by stealth by crooks and murderers.

My pleasure, Eric. Mann's whole background is fascinating (there is much in it that I can personally identify with) ? it was very much an environment of northern European Protestantism; suspicion of sensuality and the sensual life, the 'Protestant work ethic' ? much of it informs his creation of Aschenbach in Death in Venice. The guilt-ridden fear of giving the senses full rein for instance.

In his work, Mann stuck very much to the principles of his upbringing ? that was also partly as a way of trying to avoid 'giving in' to his sexuality. In Death in Venice he seems to argue against his own position ? Aschenbach dies with a smile on his face, having finally experienced a sensual blossoming. The price is not just his life, but the art that he abandons when he eventually pursues his vision of Tadzio. Is death a punishment for Aschenbach or an apotheosis? Does Mann long to be Aschanbach ? to let himself be free to be himself and to experience the sensual side of his nature without guilt or fear?

... I understand the analogy of Christ not bringing on the Inquisition, but the way Communists have organised themselves, in semi-clandestine cells with blind obedience, does suggest that they have a superiority complex, take upon themselves the duty and right to teach the rest of us how to live, and the economics to go with it...

Different communists organise themselves differently, but what you assert could easily be levied at religious groups too ? particularly today, as we see various religious groups attempting to gain political influence in a less-than-honest manner. One of the things that I find annoying about left-wing politics in general is that there is a tendency to treat it all like religion, with all the theological rows, complete with the splits and factionalisation.

... I'm sure Marx identified matters that are valuable, but I am highly suspicious of those intellectuals who try to maintain that Marxism is sound in theory, whereas those silly Russians, Chinese and North Koreans messed it all up, because they were too dumb to do it properly...

But the point is (or one point at least) is that, in effect, Marx didn't tell anyone how to 'do it'. Most of what has come to be viewed as revolutionary theory is from Lenin )particularly What is to be Done?. Marx analysed political-economic relationships and those relationships are still essentially true today, if we wish to understand class etc.

... Christianity is still a faith big time, whereas only shabby dictatorships such as Belarus and North Korea cling to the remnants of Communism...

One could point out that both the senior political figures who launched an illegal war in Iraq are, wait for it, Christians ? and well known for their religiosity. And, without getting completely side-tracked into a different and potentially contentious issue, the fact that millions of people think that McDonalds is good food doesn't make it so.

There are also a number of other countries where communism of one form or another continues ? in India, in the Calcutta region, IIRC, there has been an elected communist regional government for some years. One of its achievements has been in women's education and career opportunities ? which has, in turn, reduced the birth rate. In Nepal, the newly-elected communist government has just held a referendum to become a republic (the party is pluralist, by the way).

The US would still assert that Cuba is a dangerous commie country and they've expended plenty of money and efforts down the years to get rid of democratically-elected left-wing governments that they assert are 'communist'. Indeed, they're not too happy with Venezuela these days.

The reality is simple ? as long as you have vast swathes of the global population disenfranchised and living in abject poverty, in places such as Colombia, murdered for attempting to win basic, decent wages and working conditions, then communism will appeal to people, because it offers the idea of a world that is not run for the few at the expense of the many.

... As you can, however,

If you are going to achieve the dictatorship of the proletariat, you can't afford to have democracy...

Define democracy. What happens in many places in the world effectively disenfranchises people in one way or another. In the US, for instance, people have a choice of, err ... well, not very much of a choice, really. How much difference is there between the Republican and Democrat parties? In the UK< we're increasingly moving toward a simple position ? two main parties and little to choose between them. How democratic is that? It's democracy pretty much in name only. Is democracy really just getting to put a cross on a ballot paper every few years? Is it a democracy when, in order to have any realistic chance of winning seats in an election, you need millions of pounds, and the biggest parties get most of that from big business by way (in effect) of bribes to carry out polices that are friendly to them if elected? How is that democracy?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not proposing a Soviet system. But I do think that people bandy around the word 'democracy' a lot, without actually thinking what it means.

... But to return to that sophisticated author Thomas Mann, I admire someone on another chatsite who has read the whole of Mann's huge "Joseph and His Brothers". As with Kolakowski, I've never had the stamina. My more humble aim is to finish a second reading of "The Magic Mountain" one day, and re-read "Doktor Faustus" as well. It is the very fact that Mann blends in aspects of everyday life with philosophy that attracts me. I cannot read music, and would maybe be handicapped to an extent with musical theory, but I can handle the Settembrini-Naphta verbal duel...

I don't know that I'll ever get through Joseph. I have more of the short stories on my shelf, plus Lotte in Weimar (although I want to read The Troubles of Young Werther first) and The Holy Sinner, but I will probably be tempted back to Death in Venice again very soon. Not for nothing is it regarded by many as the finest short story ever.

... You will note that both Mann and Brecht were very bourgeois, but I prefer the former, who never pretended anything else.

Ah, but what is "bourgeois"? I'm "bourgeois" by most people's definitions ? my cultural interests, for instance, mark me that way for most people. As do my background (daughter of a clergyman) and education (a grammar school ? albeit a state one) and job (the media). However, in terms of a classical understanding of class, I'm also working class. In that I do not own the means to my own production (or have a private income) and do have to sell the labour of my hand or brain in order to keep a roof over my head and food in my belly. That, in essence, is what constitutes working class ? not a lack of education or speaking with a certain kind of accent and preferring watching soap operas on TV to reading a book. Social definitions of class confuse people ? particularly in the UK.