What do you think?
Rate this book
Männerphantasien #1
Manner Phantasien 1: Frauen, Fluten, Korper, Geschichte
First of this two-volume work providing an imaginative interpretation of the image of women in the collective unconscious of the fascist "warrior" through a study of the fantasies of the men centrally involved in the rise of Nazism.
Pocket Book
First published October 1, 1979
157 people are currently reading
4596 people want to read
About the author
Klaus Theweleit
54 books38 followersKlaus Theweleit is a German sociologist and writer.
Theweleit studied German studies and English studies in Kiel and Freiburg. From 1969-1972, he worked as a freelancer for a public radio station (Südwestfunk).
His book Männerphantasien (1977); translated as Male Fantasies (1987), a study of the fascist consciousness in general and the bodily experience of these former soldiers in particular, easily detected in their hatefilled, near-illiterate books, was well received and much discussed.
Theweleit writes in a non orthodox, highly personal and associative style. His book are heavily illustrated with cartoons, advertisements, engravings, posters and artwork.
Theweleit lives in Freiburg, he teaches in Germany, the United States, Switzerland, and Austria. He was a lecturer at the Institute of Sociology at the University of Freiburg and lecturer at the film academy in Berlin. From 1998 until retirement he was a professor for "art and theory" at the Staatlichen Akademie für Bildende Künste, the art college, at Karlsruhe.
Source: Wikipedia
Theweleit studied German studies and English studies in Kiel and Freiburg. From 1969-1972, he worked as a freelancer for a public radio station (Südwestfunk).
His book Männerphantasien (1977); translated as Male Fantasies (1987), a study of the fascist consciousness in general and the bodily experience of these former soldiers in particular, easily detected in their hatefilled, near-illiterate books, was well received and much discussed.
Theweleit writes in a non orthodox, highly personal and associative style. His book are heavily illustrated with cartoons, advertisements, engravings, posters and artwork.
Theweleit lives in Freiburg, he teaches in Germany, the United States, Switzerland, and Austria. He was a lecturer at the Institute of Sociology at the University of Freiburg and lecturer at the film academy in Berlin. From 1998 until retirement he was a professor for "art and theory" at the Staatlichen Akademie für Bildende Künste, the art college, at Karlsruhe.
Source: Wikipedia
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 54 reviews
December 16, 2021
This major scientific work dives into the sexual, psychological and sociopolitical foundation of National Socialism as it was manifested in the Weimar Republic, arguing that fascism is not a political or economic phenomenon, but a method to manufacture a specific reality. The book is based on Theweleit's dissertation on literature about Freikorps, volunteer / paramilitary units in the Weimar Republic - so yes, this author started out as a literary scientist, then ventured into sociology which he taught at Freiburg University before becoming a professor for art and theory in Karlsruhe. This kaleidoscopic approach that creates a multi-facted image that incorporates different forms of cultural production and artefacts is at the core of the appeal of "Male Fantasies": Theweleit looks at texts, images, history, sociology, political science, and, probably most importantly, psychology to decode what is now called toxic masculinity. This book is a founding document of Men's Studies.
In the first part of this first volume, Theweleit researches the relationship between men and women in the Freikorps scene, the ideal of the soldier and his sexuality, and women as the other, as threats to male ideals and representatives of the red scare. Then, he investigates the mythological background to images of floods and water which are often used to describe the female and the political enemy, the attempt to police, control, and possess female bodies, and the female body as an object of content.
Contrary to popular opinion, this text is pretty easy to read and understand, except those chapters that ponder the intricacies of Freudian psychology and how it applies or doesn't apply to the phenomena discussed here, as well as how it relates to Wilhelm Reich, Félix Guattari, and Gilles Deleuze - this is some rather tricky stuff and intricately argued (watch out: this book was first published in 1977, so it's not the latest info when it comes to these passages). Otherwise, the book very accessible and highly fascinating, but also very long - this first part has around 600 pages (in German).
Great research, still way too relevant. Let's tackle part 2.
In the first part of this first volume, Theweleit researches the relationship between men and women in the Freikorps scene, the ideal of the soldier and his sexuality, and women as the other, as threats to male ideals and representatives of the red scare. Then, he investigates the mythological background to images of floods and water which are often used to describe the female and the political enemy, the attempt to police, control, and possess female bodies, and the female body as an object of content.
Contrary to popular opinion, this text is pretty easy to read and understand, except those chapters that ponder the intricacies of Freudian psychology and how it applies or doesn't apply to the phenomena discussed here, as well as how it relates to Wilhelm Reich, Félix Guattari, and Gilles Deleuze - this is some rather tricky stuff and intricately argued (watch out: this book was first published in 1977, so it's not the latest info when it comes to these passages). Otherwise, the book very accessible and highly fascinating, but also very long - this first part has around 600 pages (in German).
Great research, still way too relevant. Let's tackle part 2.
October 25, 2011
This lengthy exposition of the lives of German men focuses on the Freikorps. Theweleit perceived their relationships with women and sexuality as being built on a foundation of misogyny and fear. He rejected the interpretation of male violence as an outgrowth of frustrated sexual desire or repression, arguing instead that the violence was itself an innate part of male desire, an end which they actively sought to achieve. Thus, male violence was not a substitute for, but rather an attack on, sex and femininity. Theweleit saw this as an important aspect of Nazi ideology, particularly in regards to its self-definition as an oppositional force to Bolshevism; both Bolshevism and femininity were seen as the embodiment of the untidy and disorderly aspects of human existence.
For alternate interpretations, see Herzog's Sex after Fascism: Memory and Morality in Twentieth-Century Germany.
For alternate interpretations, see Herzog's Sex after Fascism: Memory and Morality in Twentieth-Century Germany.
April 6, 2016
"The success of fascism demonstrates that masses who become fascist suffer more from their internal states of being than from hunger or unemployment. Fascism teaches us that under certain circumstances, human beings imprisoned within themselves, within body armor and social constraints, would rather break out than fill their stomachs; and that their politics may consist in organizing that escape, rather than an economic order that promises future generations full stomachs for life. The Utopia of fascism is an edenic freedom from responsibility. That in itself, I think, is a source of "beauty in the most profound distortion." Meanwhile, communists and the left in general still stubbornly refuse to accept fascism's horrifying proof that the materialism they preach and practice only goes halfway. The desiring-production of the unconscious, as molecular driving force of history, has never entered their materialism—an omission that has had (and still has) tragic consequences."
December 1, 2009
[Full disclosure: I only read the first section of this book, as it considers the male fascist regard for women; I only perused the second section]
A psychological study of protofascism that, in my humble estimation, is hit and miss.
The author bases his analysis of the Freikorps (the militaristic form of German fascism under the short-lived and tumultuous Weimar Republic) on a reading of their "literature." I find this sloppy and wish he'd have relied more on historical instance in making his argument instead of subjecting his readers to the lurid details of pre-Nazi pulp fiction. (Is the work of Danielle Steel reflective of the state of American feminism? C'mon.)
However, he does a good job of demonstrating 1) the shortcomings of a Freudian analysis of fascism, and 2) that protofascists (and hence, the lineage of said protofascists) didn't just dislike women -- they hated them because they are (and, I'd wager, remain) terrified of them.
Although there's a Walter Benjamin sighting, for my money Wilhelm Reich's The Mass Psychology of Fascism is a more insightful book into the psychology behind fascism (and Reich is one of Theweleit's targets), and Frontsoldaten by Stephen Fritz better demonstrates just how universal "fascist" prejudices were in Germany leading up to and during World War II, even among non-Nazis, and shows how Hitler and his band of brigands merely gave form and expression to nascent intolerance.
A psychological study of protofascism that, in my humble estimation, is hit and miss.
The author bases his analysis of the Freikorps (the militaristic form of German fascism under the short-lived and tumultuous Weimar Republic) on a reading of their "literature." I find this sloppy and wish he'd have relied more on historical instance in making his argument instead of subjecting his readers to the lurid details of pre-Nazi pulp fiction. (Is the work of Danielle Steel reflective of the state of American feminism? C'mon.)
However, he does a good job of demonstrating 1) the shortcomings of a Freudian analysis of fascism, and 2) that protofascists (and hence, the lineage of said protofascists) didn't just dislike women -- they hated them because they are (and, I'd wager, remain) terrified of them.
Although there's a Walter Benjamin sighting, for my money Wilhelm Reich's The Mass Psychology of Fascism is a more insightful book into the psychology behind fascism (and Reich is one of Theweleit's targets), and Frontsoldaten by Stephen Fritz better demonstrates just how universal "fascist" prejudices were in Germany leading up to and during World War II, even among non-Nazis, and shows how Hitler and his band of brigands merely gave form and expression to nascent intolerance.
August 7, 2020
FAR and away the best book I’ve read this year and it’s not even close. You couldn’t ask for a better resource on patriarchy and fascism.
May 9, 2020
Theweleit has a style of writing and argument that presents itself in a manner that may be described as “psychedelic.” Flurries of associative images culled from a litany of different popular sources along with tangential literary and historical discussions confront such that one must take pause and question what exactly is being claimed and its validity. Introspection often becomes the most likely response, differentiating the self from the fascist and proto-fascist subject material in the beginning stretch of the book and comparing the self to the subjects elsewhere. This opens the reader to Theweleit’s quite particular style of literary analysis and reasoning while perhaps concealing some of its own limitations.
This book is an immensely valuable project of itself in its examination of the men at hand, but it also takes as a given a theory of German fascism not quite en vogue either at the time of its writing or currently without giving it a thorough historicization. Sadly, the central role that the underground Freikorps network played in the seizure of power by the Nazis is incredibly undervalued in favor of salacious theories of oratory hypnosis or Trotskyite interpretations of a shopkeepers revolution. When the Freikorps serve as Theweleit’s principal object, he does not discuss this network’s connection to major finance capital and limits himself to the early stürmer’s own psychologies. This ultimately proves to be an artificial impediment.
Though this lingering contradiction from the beginning of the book is partially resolved by the end, we are left until the final sections of the volume for Theweleit to entertain that the novels and memoirs he uses as source material may have had more utility as propaganda than psychological catharsis (as well as to make reference to Irigaray, who could’ve helped to give the vagueness with which he makes reference to women’s sexualities some definition). Though it is obvious the Deluezian framework he intends to use from the beginning of the book, he waits until he has presented the main body of his sources to reveal this in the form of a long digression that eventually leads into his grand theoretical gestures toward sexual relations throughout European history. While I will say that his is the most convincing version of D&G I’ve heard, the attendant terminology begins to feel zany after a time in a way that undermines his theorization of these social changes rather than supports them. Ultimately, this framework centering around “desiring machines” leads to claustrophobia, with an attribution of guilt feelings from parental contact at the basic fault stage as the culprit for these men’s psychopathy and a slightly cliched proscription of genuinely open human relationships running underneath.
Theweleit’s scope becomes apparent when he makes claims such as that political and class distinctins for the Freikorps were “primarily” stand-ins for those of a sexual nature. It’s easy to see how he means primary here in terms of phenomena and experience, but his aversion from discussions of the role the “race” played on the psyche causes one gives reason to question this. Though he does give some incisive class analysis in passing, his attempts to supplant Marxist class theories with his own framework also belies these problems. Most troublesome in this vein is a brief approving citation of the anti-Semite Solzhenitsyn for a description of Soviet prison conditions.
Much of the above may downplay the achievements of this book. What Theweleit does exceptionally well is describe with vivid detail the psychic lives of these homicidal men. That is immensely valuable as a measure moving forward with the current ebbs and flows of the patriarchal society in which we live. The production of men such as those described in this volume still plays a vital role in the maintenance of class power today. With the proliferation of mercenary paramilitary operations and GLADIO public terror, this role has become even more developed and refined.
This book is an immensely valuable project of itself in its examination of the men at hand, but it also takes as a given a theory of German fascism not quite en vogue either at the time of its writing or currently without giving it a thorough historicization. Sadly, the central role that the underground Freikorps network played in the seizure of power by the Nazis is incredibly undervalued in favor of salacious theories of oratory hypnosis or Trotskyite interpretations of a shopkeepers revolution. When the Freikorps serve as Theweleit’s principal object, he does not discuss this network’s connection to major finance capital and limits himself to the early stürmer’s own psychologies. This ultimately proves to be an artificial impediment.
Though this lingering contradiction from the beginning of the book is partially resolved by the end, we are left until the final sections of the volume for Theweleit to entertain that the novels and memoirs he uses as source material may have had more utility as propaganda than psychological catharsis (as well as to make reference to Irigaray, who could’ve helped to give the vagueness with which he makes reference to women’s sexualities some definition). Though it is obvious the Deluezian framework he intends to use from the beginning of the book, he waits until he has presented the main body of his sources to reveal this in the form of a long digression that eventually leads into his grand theoretical gestures toward sexual relations throughout European history. While I will say that his is the most convincing version of D&G I’ve heard, the attendant terminology begins to feel zany after a time in a way that undermines his theorization of these social changes rather than supports them. Ultimately, this framework centering around “desiring machines” leads to claustrophobia, with an attribution of guilt feelings from parental contact at the basic fault stage as the culprit for these men’s psychopathy and a slightly cliched proscription of genuinely open human relationships running underneath.
Theweleit’s scope becomes apparent when he makes claims such as that political and class distinctins for the Freikorps were “primarily” stand-ins for those of a sexual nature. It’s easy to see how he means primary here in terms of phenomena and experience, but his aversion from discussions of the role the “race” played on the psyche causes one gives reason to question this. Though he does give some incisive class analysis in passing, his attempts to supplant Marxist class theories with his own framework also belies these problems. Most troublesome in this vein is a brief approving citation of the anti-Semite Solzhenitsyn for a description of Soviet prison conditions.
Much of the above may downplay the achievements of this book. What Theweleit does exceptionally well is describe with vivid detail the psychic lives of these homicidal men. That is immensely valuable as a measure moving forward with the current ebbs and flows of the patriarchal society in which we live. The production of men such as those described in this volume still plays a vital role in the maintenance of class power today. With the proliferation of mercenary paramilitary operations and GLADIO public terror, this role has become even more developed and refined.
December 30, 2021
wild and wacky freewheeling book psychoanalysing the insane literature produced by everyone's favourite proto nazis, the freikorps. i'm not really sure if i was 100% convinced by much of anything here but it's a fascinating book all the same and i like how he'll just go off on tangents or digress for a whole chapter or start talking about what deleuze and guatarri had to say about freud. i'll probably read volume 2 at some point when i want more wacky 70s leftist theory in my brain.
October 16, 2023
Extremely compelling theory of fascism and masculinity and the best psychoanalytic gloss on Anti-Oedipus and Reich (among much else) I've read.
Read
July 22, 2023Can’t believe I finally finished this
January 6, 2023
Certainly a slog at parts but you’d be hard pressed to find a better concretisation of deleuzoguattarian analysis anywhere. The Freikorps and the historical determinations behind them are fascinating, with the collusion of the conditions of their inception and ours being really quite unnerving. Theweleit’s solutions concerning body-armour and the nature of desiring-production do strike me as somewhat adolescent at times, a bit too new agey and utopian and ooohh ahh embrace your body and skin and the determinations of your feminine unconscious and ooohh this is a discourse written by a man so don’t listen to me pal! but the analysis is so bloody incisive when he isn’t busy trying to derive some generalised prescriptive/normative conclusions from what he’s writing about that I’d consider this a necessary tool in the fight against the fascist tendency - which keeps on rearing it’s godforsaken head (even in writers like Brecht with their implicit misogyny, placing empirical women below the iconography of a great infinite flood/big wet menstruating fanny etc.) - so yeah go out and snatch this piece up sharpish you goddamn fools.
August 12, 2011
The ecstatic mingling of Freud, Guattari, Deleuze, and Reich, decorated with many unattributed and undated images, marks this as a work riding high on the academic euphoria of the 1970s, before the buzzkill 1980s.
Not only did I enjoy reading Theweleit, I wish that I could write the same book. But I can't. For one thing, Theweleit already wrote it. For another, nobody gets to use Freud like that anymore. And, lastly, the trend of psychoanalyzing historical subjects got lost somewhere in the disco snow.
I'm making light, of course. Like disco snow, academic fashions have been rewarded with returns. The more serious issue is how to proceed in a manner inspired by Theweleit but also in a post-Reichian (although still Deleuzian... Well, I prefer the term "Deleuz-ional") world. In particular, a problem with, and the underlying and inexhaustible inspiration for, Theweleit's topic is that it is soooo big and soooo embedded in layer upon uneven layer of post-Englightenment capitalist societies. The topic of gender and the various roles of women -- defined and desired as bodies bound to class -- guides Theweleit down every rabbit hole. By the 434th page of Volume One, I had to remind myself that this book opened with analyses of Freikorps literature. It spiraled up and away from that with dizzying rapidity, but I cannot say that the journey was unpleasant.
Not only did I enjoy reading Theweleit, I wish that I could write the same book. But I can't. For one thing, Theweleit already wrote it. For another, nobody gets to use Freud like that anymore. And, lastly, the trend of psychoanalyzing historical subjects got lost somewhere in the disco snow.
I'm making light, of course. Like disco snow, academic fashions have been rewarded with returns. The more serious issue is how to proceed in a manner inspired by Theweleit but also in a post-Reichian (although still Deleuzian... Well, I prefer the term "Deleuz-ional") world. In particular, a problem with, and the underlying and inexhaustible inspiration for, Theweleit's topic is that it is soooo big and soooo embedded in layer upon uneven layer of post-Englightenment capitalist societies. The topic of gender and the various roles of women -- defined and desired as bodies bound to class -- guides Theweleit down every rabbit hole. By the 434th page of Volume One, I had to remind myself that this book opened with analyses of Freikorps literature. It spiraled up and away from that with dizzying rapidity, but I cannot say that the journey was unpleasant.
January 21, 2021
This is the best example I have encountered (so far) of Deleuze and Guattari's schizoanalytic theory actually put into practice by someone other than D&G themselves. Theweleit reframes the question of fascism away from theories of ideology, traditional psychoanalysis, or economic reductionism and instead asks "how were fascist bodies formed in the years preceding the third reich? Why were proto-nazis terrified of being overwhelmed by a 'red flood'? Why did Freikorps mercenaries openly manifest erotic satisfaction from horrific acts of murder?". To answer these, he begins with the autobiographical writings of Freikorps soldiers and ends up developing a complex history of patriarchy, colonialism, and the role of sexuality in class conflict.
I do have reservations about Male Fantasies, all stemming from its reliance on Anti-Oedipus - it shares weaknesses with D&G's early work, namely a tendency toward anarchist utopianism, and un- (or under-) critical affirmation of every movement of deterritorialization. Reading it in 2021 with a cursory familiarty with debates around french theory and having read Mark Fisher, Zizek, etc., I was (over?)sensitive to the ways that Theweleits discourse prefigured some aspects of neoliberal anti-communism. Regardless, Male Fantasies is a brillant, well-researched study of fascism, and is definitely worth reading and engaging with.
I do have reservations about Male Fantasies, all stemming from its reliance on Anti-Oedipus - it shares weaknesses with D&G's early work, namely a tendency toward anarchist utopianism, and un- (or under-) critical affirmation of every movement of deterritorialization. Reading it in 2021 with a cursory familiarty with debates around french theory and having read Mark Fisher, Zizek, etc., I was (over?)sensitive to the ways that Theweleits discourse prefigured some aspects of neoliberal anti-communism. Regardless, Male Fantasies is a brillant, well-researched study of fascism, and is definitely worth reading and engaging with.
February 2, 2024
I used to post heavily on 4chan and incel forums before I transitioned male to female.
I found "Male Fantasies" very relatable but triggering.
I also don't think Theweleit fully gets the experience of shame, violence and dissociation.
Also, Theweleit's whole psychoanalysis doesn't work for transgender women which is bad because hate groups are oddly popular for neurodivergent transgender women.
For some people, to be a body amidst bodies is to be at war.
Not in himself the soldier goes outside of himself possessing his focus.
So, the sniper sees the couple making love in the forest as a sexual assault against his gaze.
Just my 2 cents.
I found "Male Fantasies" very relatable but triggering.
I also don't think Theweleit fully gets the experience of shame, violence and dissociation.
Also, Theweleit's whole psychoanalysis doesn't work for transgender women which is bad because hate groups are oddly popular for neurodivergent transgender women.
For some people, to be a body amidst bodies is to be at war.
Not in himself the soldier goes outside of himself possessing his focus.
So, the sniper sees the couple making love in the forest as a sexual assault against his gaze.
Just my 2 cents.
March 4, 2021
sometimes i thought to myself ... ok i could just have read Foucault’s 6 page intro to Anti-Oedipus.. other times i thought to myself alright this kicks ass and is one of the most lucid studies into the desiring-production of fascism. probably won’t get around to volume 2 anytime soon but definitely added to my list
August 21, 2024
Tell ‘em Klaus!
February 23, 2015
So far it is about journal entries from Freikorp members analyzed for content about girlfriends, wives, women, fantasies, and realities. Very well written and impactful, this book extends a bridge for feminists and communists, who may know their commitment to these politics on a personal level, to link with anti-fascism.
May 17, 2023
i think he lost me with the bits about how our species was temporarily aquatic
January 6, 2025
This took me a long time to read. Granted, the end of the year is a busy time of year - but i did feel like this book was particularly clunky. Poetic at times, it demands a great deal of familiarity with Freud, psychoanalysis, Deleuze, German history, art, greek mythology, and so on. Many times I had to put the book down to Google some reference that was important to Theweleit's point. Prose aside, it is clearly a wide-ranging read that - which while specific to its subject - is not narrow in its analysis. Biggest takeaways: Fascism is not all-or-nothing and is not merely political/economic, but deeply subjective and anti-social in nature; its basic presumptions are poor women are the enemy, rich women are unattainable - and if attained, now hyper-promiscuous; Freud, other than a wildly horny coke addict, was a misogynist and not really an especially relevant thinker unless you want him to be; among others. I'm giving it 3/5 because it was terribly difficult to comprehend and sometimes seemed totally speculative. But i am going to read the second volume to wrap it up as I've seen others say it's a lot better.
August 12, 2025
This took me almost a year to get through and was very hard but it also changed the way I think about the world permanently :)
January 11, 2021
There is so much to unpack about this book, both as a political intervention in debates that surrounded the German new left at the time of its initial publication and as a theoretical intervention in theories of fascism (not to mention European politics, psychoanalysis, and theories of modernity). I am obviously not going to be doing all of that here, only offering some mostly unorganized thoughts.
Due to this epic scope it is difficult to assess Männerphantasien as a coherent whole, which at times works too well to Theweleit's advantage. This latter point is also bolstered by Theweleit's highly irregular, almost psychedelic organizational and stylistic choices. At times I found myself on the verge of a measured critique of Theweleit's central arguments, but the rate at which Theweleit deftly moves between his own argument, other theorists of fascism's perspectives, his Freikorps interlocutor's perspective and various historical contexts often left me second guessing what it is I was objecting to. Now that I have read the second volume and had some time away from this book I think I finally understand what it is Theweleit is doing and why I found it objectionable:
To start, some of Theweleit's most useful insights about what exactly fascism is or does (for instance, fascism as a kind of gendered technique for policing and managing one's bodily constitution) are, in fact, nothing new- Theweleit accredits only a fraction of the feminist thinkers he draws from.
While reading Phantasien I found myself constantly asking how exactly race and antisemitism (you know, the thing Nazis never stopped talking about) factored into Theweleit's theory, only for Theweleit -shrewd writer that he is- to routinely raise this question himself either to defer a proper answer ad infinitum or -worse- dismiss the question of race outright as being about "something else" (how's that for irony) entirely: sex, one's body, fear of women, an unhealthy relationship with one's mother, etc . Theweleit's systematic refusal to engage with race haunts this book, although these analytical limits are front and center in Phantasien's second volume, which is demonstrative of the strange and offensive kind of mental gymnastics one has to perform in order to make a general theory of fascism that sees race as someone else's problem. As for the theory itself: while Theweleit spends a considerable portion of this book criticizing Wilhelm Reich's work on fascism (in particular, his argument that fascism is essentially the product of male repression and, therefore, that fascism's genocidal nationalism is the outcome of a society that tries to hold back and suppress male desires), this seems to elide the fact that for all of his polemicizing, Theweleit never fully works his way out of Reich's basic premise. I don't who this says more about: Theweleit, Reich, Deleuze (who Theweleit uses to try to work his way out of the hole Reich dug), or Adorno (who has his own quite nuanced psychosexual theory of fascism that Theweleit never completely engages with- why is that?).
Männerphantasien is at its best in the first section, which deals directly with the journalistic writings of various Freikorps soldiers. Theweleit places various these -at times highly private and confessional- writings with Freudian analysis, art, and even personal anecdotes in order to to point to certain psychosocial patterns. In doing this, Theweleit often raises highly generative questions that deserve serious (re)consideration. Nevertheless, Theweleit's discussion of his primary sources is heavily contoured by the suppositions of his predecessors (such as Reich). For instance, the thoroughly documented instances of Freikorps members (not to mention the SA and SS in WWII) committing acts of rape in Europe and colonial Africa/Asia clearly complicate and at times directly contradict Theweleit's own reading.
Approach Männerphantasien with caution. If you are interested in understanding fascism, Theweleit deserves to be read, but he also deserves to be responded to.
Due to this epic scope it is difficult to assess Männerphantasien as a coherent whole, which at times works too well to Theweleit's advantage. This latter point is also bolstered by Theweleit's highly irregular, almost psychedelic organizational and stylistic choices. At times I found myself on the verge of a measured critique of Theweleit's central arguments, but the rate at which Theweleit deftly moves between his own argument, other theorists of fascism's perspectives, his Freikorps interlocutor's perspective and various historical contexts often left me second guessing what it is I was objecting to. Now that I have read the second volume and had some time away from this book I think I finally understand what it is Theweleit is doing and why I found it objectionable:
To start, some of Theweleit's most useful insights about what exactly fascism is or does (for instance, fascism as a kind of gendered technique for policing and managing one's bodily constitution) are, in fact, nothing new- Theweleit accredits only a fraction of the feminist thinkers he draws from.
While reading Phantasien I found myself constantly asking how exactly race and antisemitism (you know, the thing Nazis never stopped talking about) factored into Theweleit's theory, only for Theweleit -shrewd writer that he is- to routinely raise this question himself either to defer a proper answer ad infinitum or -worse- dismiss the question of race outright as being about "something else" (how's that for irony) entirely: sex, one's body, fear of women, an unhealthy relationship with one's mother, etc . Theweleit's systematic refusal to engage with race haunts this book, although these analytical limits are front and center in Phantasien's second volume, which is demonstrative of the strange and offensive kind of mental gymnastics one has to perform in order to make a general theory of fascism that sees race as someone else's problem. As for the theory itself: while Theweleit spends a considerable portion of this book criticizing Wilhelm Reich's work on fascism (in particular, his argument that fascism is essentially the product of male repression and, therefore, that fascism's genocidal nationalism is the outcome of a society that tries to hold back and suppress male desires), this seems to elide the fact that for all of his polemicizing, Theweleit never fully works his way out of Reich's basic premise. I don't who this says more about: Theweleit, Reich, Deleuze (who Theweleit uses to try to work his way out of the hole Reich dug), or Adorno (who has his own quite nuanced psychosexual theory of fascism that Theweleit never completely engages with- why is that?).
Männerphantasien is at its best in the first section, which deals directly with the journalistic writings of various Freikorps soldiers. Theweleit places various these -at times highly private and confessional- writings with Freudian analysis, art, and even personal anecdotes in order to to point to certain psychosocial patterns. In doing this, Theweleit often raises highly generative questions that deserve serious (re)consideration. Nevertheless, Theweleit's discussion of his primary sources is heavily contoured by the suppositions of his predecessors (such as Reich). For instance, the thoroughly documented instances of Freikorps members (not to mention the SA and SS in WWII) committing acts of rape in Europe and colonial Africa/Asia clearly complicate and at times directly contradict Theweleit's own reading.
Approach Männerphantasien with caution. If you are interested in understanding fascism, Theweleit deserves to be read, but he also deserves to be responded to.
May 14, 2024
Once in a while you come across a book that shifts your worldview and your sense of history / of self entirely. This was that book for me. I initially got into it because I thought it would be a great addition to my interest in Zone Of Interest because the film references the book indirectly, but the book had surprisingly little to do with the Nazis. In fact, the men this book is analyzing are the members of the Freikorps militia, who preceded the Nazis — and even when they’re mentioned it’s sparingly. What really made this book special for me was how it used Deleuze & Guittari to carefully dissect the Oedipal complex in Western society and WHY it appears, which takes maybe 250 dense pages to really get into (takes us back to early humans). But it does such a great job of putting into context our modern gender relations, how we got here, and most frighteningly — how facism does not arise despite our society’s rules and conventions but because of them, and how we kinda are living under facism right now because we live in a world where some people have more value than others, and that’s something so simple and obvious but we all wake up and accept this. So much of what I read made me so sad for all the young boys and girls entering this world, feeling like they have to change themselves to fit in, to silence the beautiful passions within them because they’re told these passions are dirty and shameful. Probably won’t read volume two, this was exhausting and took me months. But I highly recommend: this was the first book to make Freud, Lacan, and other post-structuralist philosophy actually make sense because of how Theweleit applies and picks apart their arguments. Everything he introduces is put into context and cross-examined, so this dense book written so well allowed me to retain so much more than I usually do with these sorts of books.
October 30, 2024
This is volume one of Theweleit's now classic sweeping socio-psychoanalytic study on the proto-nazi paramilitary units called the Freikorps. He focused specifically on the ultra-right-wing militias and mercenaries that coalesced across Germany in the wake of World War I. This book is a broad (vol 1 & 2 make up 1100 pages), surreal examination of fascist masculinity.
Theweleit published this in 1977, and at the time, academia was filled with sociological and scathing marxist approaches to the psychology of fascism. In response, he deliberately takes a different, more psychoanalytic, detached perspective here. Although he does use Deleuze & Guattari, Foucault, and other usual critical theory suspects for his analysis, clearly making it an anti-fascist book.
Theweleit is absolutely fascinated with the perversion and violence of these men. He goes into the cavernous depths of their fantasies, sexuality and base passions. The basic thread that weaves this book is the inextricable link between sex and violence, between the domestic and the militant in these men's lives. He uses extensive quotes to demonstrate this juncture throughout. He never describes them as perverse, rather showing them as an extreme example of an inherent truth about sex, or rather of human desire. For them, death and destruction are a form of creation, a "reproduction," as Ehrenreich calls it in the intro.
I have to say there were times when I just didn't like Theweleit's analysis a lot. It felt very contrived towards his thesis. Because the subjects are very fascinating, it still made for a worthy read anyway. His use of psychoanalytic literature is pretty masterly, not overdone. So, on the whole, I loved reading this and will pick up the second volume soon.
Theweleit published this in 1977, and at the time, academia was filled with sociological and scathing marxist approaches to the psychology of fascism. In response, he deliberately takes a different, more psychoanalytic, detached perspective here. Although he does use Deleuze & Guattari, Foucault, and other usual critical theory suspects for his analysis, clearly making it an anti-fascist book.
Theweleit is absolutely fascinated with the perversion and violence of these men. He goes into the cavernous depths of their fantasies, sexuality and base passions. The basic thread that weaves this book is the inextricable link between sex and violence, between the domestic and the militant in these men's lives. He uses extensive quotes to demonstrate this juncture throughout. He never describes them as perverse, rather showing them as an extreme example of an inherent truth about sex, or rather of human desire. For them, death and destruction are a form of creation, a "reproduction," as Ehrenreich calls it in the intro.
I have to say there were times when I just didn't like Theweleit's analysis a lot. It felt very contrived towards his thesis. Because the subjects are very fascinating, it still made for a worthy read anyway. His use of psychoanalytic literature is pretty masterly, not overdone. So, on the whole, I loved reading this and will pick up the second volume soon.
May 20, 2022
Though somewhat long-winded at times, Theweleit's psychoanalytically-informed reading of the German Freikorps and fascism is an insightful extension of Freudian ideas through a Deleuzian lens.
One of his most important points is this: "The monumentalism of fascism would seem to be a safety mechanism against the bewildering multiplicity of the living. The more lifeless, regimented, and monumental reality appears to be, the more secure the men feel. The danger is being-alive itself." (218)
An absolutely important book, especially for understanding extreme right-wing ideology in our current times. It also sheds a lot of light on the monstrosity of the thing that is "man".
One of his most important points is this: "The monumentalism of fascism would seem to be a safety mechanism against the bewildering multiplicity of the living. The more lifeless, regimented, and monumental reality appears to be, the more secure the men feel. The danger is being-alive itself." (218)
An absolutely important book, especially for understanding extreme right-wing ideology in our current times. It also sheds a lot of light on the monstrosity of the thing that is "man".
May 30, 2009
this book has some scary pictures and it gave me nightmares.
October 17, 2020
A very powerful and original take on fascism. Maybe Freud works on a collective level?
November 21, 2024
“She is a natural catastrophe, a freak. The sexuality of the proletarian woman/gunslinging whore/ communist is out to castrate and shred men to pieces. It seems to be her imaginary penis that allows her to do so”
“The price of an upper class woman is submission to his own social castration. The man who takes this step will only remain ‘potent’ as long as the system in which he ‘rose’ remains potent. His prick- token of superior social power- is glued on: a dildo in name of the law! At the very mention of revolution these men hear castration. Any attmept to rob them of their dildo might expose the wound."
“...Where we swim the divine law of the sea knows no laws, one fish, two fish: Where we are part of every ocean, which is part of every vagina...”
A feminist and psychoanalytic analysis of novels and letters written by Freikorpsmen, members of the proto fascist paramilitaries that were instrumental to Hitlers rise!
The title of this book is so portentous it always makes me laugh and as these choice quotes show, Theweleit delivers on the draAaAmMaA!
But in all seriousness this really was pretty fascinating, and Dense as it inevitably can be, Thewelit is really onto something with his thesis of fascism as an antipleasure death cult originating from gender segregation and Freikorpsmen’s extreme anxieties about their own desire and bodily functions.
For most their lives these men of the Freikorps’ complete lack of experience with women outside of their family resulted in a confused sexuality and idealization of the mother. Though treasured as their only source of tenderness she is also not allowed her own independent existence much less a sexual one. Without this recognition of independence, of life, their described ideal mother, one who quietly mourns the death of her martyred son, stripped of prospect of pleasure or future happiness, and utterly devoted to the his memory, already serves as a sort of concealed aggression. Wives aren’t much more lucky, almost never actually named in these men’s texts; they seem to merely overtake the maternal role only with an uncommented upon sexual dimension.
Therefore any actively sexual, actively alive woman becomes a vulgar opposite of the mother. Where she was the epitome of tenderness, this woman must be unfeeling.and being unfeeling she must be a threat, what will she do with his genitals if she ever got a handle on them? Castration! Thus any woman outside of the idealized role, any actually alive, self directed woman is a threat to these men.
This anxiety and revulsion extends to everything having to do with their own bodily fluids, any release of the tension that keeps them strong, reminding them they are messy living beings with subconscious urges
Thus their obsession in these works with rivers, mires, slime, decay, all of which serve to break boundaries, and allow what was forbidden to rise to the top.
“The price of an upper class woman is submission to his own social castration. The man who takes this step will only remain ‘potent’ as long as the system in which he ‘rose’ remains potent. His prick- token of superior social power- is glued on: a dildo in name of the law! At the very mention of revolution these men hear castration. Any attmept to rob them of their dildo might expose the wound."
“...Where we swim the divine law of the sea knows no laws, one fish, two fish: Where we are part of every ocean, which is part of every vagina...”
A feminist and psychoanalytic analysis of novels and letters written by Freikorpsmen, members of the proto fascist paramilitaries that were instrumental to Hitlers rise!
The title of this book is so portentous it always makes me laugh and as these choice quotes show, Theweleit delivers on the draAaAmMaA!
But in all seriousness this really was pretty fascinating, and Dense as it inevitably can be, Thewelit is really onto something with his thesis of fascism as an antipleasure death cult originating from gender segregation and Freikorpsmen’s extreme anxieties about their own desire and bodily functions.
For most their lives these men of the Freikorps’ complete lack of experience with women outside of their family resulted in a confused sexuality and idealization of the mother. Though treasured as their only source of tenderness she is also not allowed her own independent existence much less a sexual one. Without this recognition of independence, of life, their described ideal mother, one who quietly mourns the death of her martyred son, stripped of prospect of pleasure or future happiness, and utterly devoted to the his memory, already serves as a sort of concealed aggression. Wives aren’t much more lucky, almost never actually named in these men’s texts; they seem to merely overtake the maternal role only with an uncommented upon sexual dimension.
Therefore any actively sexual, actively alive woman becomes a vulgar opposite of the mother. Where she was the epitome of tenderness, this woman must be unfeeling.and being unfeeling she must be a threat, what will she do with his genitals if she ever got a handle on them? Castration! Thus any woman outside of the idealized role, any actually alive, self directed woman is a threat to these men.
This anxiety and revulsion extends to everything having to do with their own bodily fluids, any release of the tension that keeps them strong, reminding them they are messy living beings with subconscious urges
Thus their obsession in these works with rivers, mires, slime, decay, all of which serve to break boundaries, and allow what was forbidden to rise to the top.
November 14, 2024
This is the kind of book that can honestly be defined as a life’s work. And there’s a Volume 2??? I know that back in the 1980s people didn’t have apps to fragment their attention span but I cannot even begin to fathom how one begins to put together such a piece of academic writing that is so impressive in scope, rich in sources, and surprisingly coherent (to my feeble, porous mind) and accessible. It took me three in-office days to slowly get through the chapters during my lunch break and between emails.
I picked up this book because I saw someone describe it as an analysis of fascist novels with the purpose of arguing that fascism is a “form of reality production that is constantly present,” especially in relationships between men and women because these relations are “a sexuality of the oppressor and the oppressed.” That’s the first half. The second half tries to give an overview of the way women have been associated with water and where and why for the past 500 years or so—like I said, very ambitious. Needless to say, both sections referenced psychoanalytic theory a lot (usually to disagree/disprove) but I think you can skip those parts and still find something that resonates. My favourite part was when he brought up someone’s theory of how women in the past must have spent a lot of time in water, which is why human evolved to have little body hair AND a layer of fat, which are contradictory save under certain circumstances. I really liked the idea of women evolving to have long head hair for their babies to hold onto while floating about.
In sum (shoddily), this book tries to explain where toxic masculinity came from and how it is sustained and reproduced especially through fascist indoctrination, years before that term even entered the vernacular, and the author uses war novels written by the Freikorps as a starting point. I’m not even going to try summarising in this tiny space and I cannot fit 70+ photos into this post but I will say that his approach was very unexpected and enlightening you have to trust me on this. I will be thinking about (and annoyingly quoting from) this book so much from now on.
I picked up this book because I saw someone describe it as an analysis of fascist novels with the purpose of arguing that fascism is a “form of reality production that is constantly present,” especially in relationships between men and women because these relations are “a sexuality of the oppressor and the oppressed.” That’s the first half. The second half tries to give an overview of the way women have been associated with water and where and why for the past 500 years or so—like I said, very ambitious. Needless to say, both sections referenced psychoanalytic theory a lot (usually to disagree/disprove) but I think you can skip those parts and still find something that resonates. My favourite part was when he brought up someone’s theory of how women in the past must have spent a lot of time in water, which is why human evolved to have little body hair AND a layer of fat, which are contradictory save under certain circumstances. I really liked the idea of women evolving to have long head hair for their babies to hold onto while floating about.
In sum (shoddily), this book tries to explain where toxic masculinity came from and how it is sustained and reproduced especially through fascist indoctrination, years before that term even entered the vernacular, and the author uses war novels written by the Freikorps as a starting point. I’m not even going to try summarising in this tiny space and I cannot fit 70+ photos into this post but I will say that his approach was very unexpected and enlightening you have to trust me on this. I will be thinking about (and annoyingly quoting from) this book so much from now on.
Read
August 7, 2025I found the structure/organization of this book ABYSMAL. Initially, it goes into a literary analysis of various Freikorps writings, which I found quite interesting socio-historically. Then there's about 200+ pages full of the most head scratching psychoanalytical takes I've had the misfortune of reading. He even puts in a footnote that there are passages he chose to quote "at random" just because they mention floods, currents, etc. Theweleit makes far reaching conclusions that it was laughable and almost amateuristic. This is clearly a personal preference, but I do not find Freud convincing to begin with, so any reference to castration or Oedipus was a fucking drag. Overall, there were truly too many unsubstantiated claims made in this book that I found my experience with this book unpleasant.
I still think I learned a lot through this book - either with what the author was intentionally trying to convey, or because he brought up topics and trends that made me think about them separately. The nameless wife, the commodification of women, the erasure of Mary through the Protestant movements - all very intriguing concepts. I didn't come away empty handed, so that's worth something. Those more interested in psychoanalysis/philosophy would probably enjoy this, but I think they're people I wouldn't want to hang out with.
I still think I learned a lot through this book - either with what the author was intentionally trying to convey, or because he brought up topics and trends that made me think about them separately. The nameless wife, the commodification of women, the erasure of Mary through the Protestant movements - all very intriguing concepts. I didn't come away empty handed, so that's worth something. Those more interested in psychoanalysis/philosophy would probably enjoy this, but I think they're people I wouldn't want to hang out with.
October 9, 2025
DNF (unfortunately)
Make no mistake, this is a fantastic book. It is incredibly well-researched, impeccably written and an incredibly interesting read. In forming his analysis, Theweleit reaches for the literary works of the Freikorps, a volunteer, fascist paramilitary unit in the Weimar Republic. Relying on their journal entries, autobiographies, novels, poems and plays, Theweleit introduces his theory of fascist subjectivity.
Fascism is not a defined ideology to Theweleit. Instead, it is a (male) body condition. Fascist, soldier men are “fragmentary bodies” that overcome the feeling of disintegration through the act of killing. They harness the war machine and internalise it as a virtue.
To me, Theweleit theorises fascist masculinity as an anti-pleasure, death cult and the antithesis of life itself.
The first half of this book is fascinating. As a literature review, Male Fantasies is a five-star read. Theweleit loses me with his psychoanalysis. It is simply not my thing.
I am hoping that I will pick this book up again and finally finish it but I don’t think that will be any time soon.
Make no mistake, this is a fantastic book. It is incredibly well-researched, impeccably written and an incredibly interesting read. In forming his analysis, Theweleit reaches for the literary works of the Freikorps, a volunteer, fascist paramilitary unit in the Weimar Republic. Relying on their journal entries, autobiographies, novels, poems and plays, Theweleit introduces his theory of fascist subjectivity.
Fascism is not a defined ideology to Theweleit. Instead, it is a (male) body condition. Fascist, soldier men are “fragmentary bodies” that overcome the feeling of disintegration through the act of killing. They harness the war machine and internalise it as a virtue.
To me, Theweleit theorises fascist masculinity as an anti-pleasure, death cult and the antithesis of life itself.
The first half of this book is fascinating. As a literature review, Male Fantasies is a five-star read. Theweleit loses me with his psychoanalysis. It is simply not my thing.
I am hoping that I will pick this book up again and finally finish it but I don’t think that will be any time soon.
Read
April 25, 2021Could not read till the end. This was the most boring book about fascism that i have read. The beginning was interesting, but at the 300 pages, this book became a very complicated feminist psychoanalyses of art that i could not stand. I am unable to take psychoanalyses seriously (maybe just my ignorance), because it seems just speculation that every problem can be reduces to phallic symbols. The arguments very hard to understand and seemed to go for ever, without getting to the main point. Horrible book.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 54 reviews