Alexander

by Klaus Mann, David Carter (Translation), Jean Cocteau (Foreword)

Klaus Manns „Roman der Utopie“ - ein frühes Meisterwerk aus dem Jahr 1929. „Der Mazedonier wollte die Welt nicht nur erobern: Ihm ging es darum, sie zu einen und unter seinem Zepter glücklich zu machen. War es nicht das Goldene Zeitalter, ja das Paradies, was er zu bringen dachte? Welch kindlich kühne, welch göttlich inspirierte Utopie!“ So Klaus Mann in seiner Autobiographie „Der Wendepunkt".

Genres: Fiction, Historical Fiction, German Literature, LGBT, Germany

214 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1929

About the author

Born in Munich, Klaus Mann was the son of German writer Thomas Mann and his wife, Katia Pringsheim. His father was baptized as a Lutheran, while his mother was from a family of secular Jews.

Mann's most famous novel, Mephisto, was written in 1936 and first published in Amsterdam. The novel is a thinly-disguised portrait of his former brother-in-law, the actor Gustaf Gründgens. The literary scandal surrounding it made Mann posthumously famous in West Germany, as Gründgens' adopted son brought a legal case to have the novel banned after its first publication in West Germany in the early 1960s. After seven years of legal hearings, the West German Supreme Court upheld the ban, although it continued to be available in East Germany and abroad. The ban was lifted and the novel published in West Germany in 1981.

Mann died in Cannes from an overdose of sleeping pills on 21 May 1949, following further drug treatment. He likely committed suicide because of financial problems and social isolation. He was buried in Cannes at the Cimetière du Grand Jas.

Reviews

[Mohammadbozorgi · Rating 5 out of 5]

راستش در تا میانه. ی کتاب خیلی جذبش نشدم ام وقتی رمان را تمام کردم تازه فهمیدم به چه شاهکاری طرف بوده ام. از پسر توماس مان کمتر از این هم انتظار نمیرود

[David · Rating 4 out of 5]

A strange book, but I liked it. A feature mentioned in the translator's intro is that highly poetic language alternates with ordinary speech throughout the book. It was startling at first, and then I just got used to it. The Christian overtones of the ending might have been annoying, but I just put it down to the general weirdness of the book. In the end, I think the weirdness of the novel is well suited to the strangeness of Alexander's story, so it works. I'm not sure this would be everyone's cup of tea, but it worked for me.

Another interesting note from the Translator's introduction: Before he wrote Alexander, Klaus Mann's first novel was one of the first novel's in Germany to deal with homosexuality openly, and "inspired" his father, Thomas Mann, to write an essay in which he condemned homoeroticism. Since we know from his own diaries that Thomas Mann was a closet case, I'd say this story does not reflect well on him. Certainly puts Klaus's version of Alexander's story in an interesting light.

[Bill · Rating 4 out of 5]

Well written novel about the life and death of Alexander the Great, written by Klauss Mann, son of Thomas Mann. Not to be taken as historically accurate by any means...a couple of examples: in real life Alexander married a woman called Roxane...he does this in the novel as well but in the book she is the queen of a band of Amazon women (in Asia of all places) who have their breasts surgically removed.Also while in India they come across a six-handed apeman who can strangle six people at once (very handy, ha ha).An enjoyable read nonetheless.

[diario_de_um_leitor_pjv · Rating 3 out of 5]

Uma escrita melancólica, num registo algo histórico. Apesar de uma perspectiva mais simbólica o livro nao me convenceu.

[Alex · Rating 3 out of 5]

A very different portrait of Alexander of Macedonia than, for example, that given in the Mary Renault books. Mary over Klaus in this instance, hands down.

I could have down without the messianic foreshadowing in the end.

[niklas · Rating 3 out of 5]

pluspunkt für die heteroromantischen storylines aber irgendwie war mir die handlung doch zu rushed

[Liam Ostermann · Rating 4 out of 5]

I've given this novel four stars out of sympathy for poor Klaus Mann forever in the shadow of his unique father. Of course he can't measure up or compare. Honestly I doubt if we would have so many of Klaus's novels available in English if he wasn't his father's son. It is not bad for its time, it is apparently the first novel to deal with Alexander's homosexuality but it is only known to us because so many ancient authors dealt with Alexander's same sex relationships (I can't bring myself to use gay because as a term in is anachronistic and that isn't because I am trying to deny or downplay how much he may have loved men and enjoyed sex with men) openly and unproblematically. Whether it is a good portrait of Alexander another thing, it is historically very inaccurate and overall has much more to do with Klaus commenting on the dictators of the 1930s then attempting any real attempt at Alexander and his times.

As part of Klaus Mann's life and work it is an interesting book, but whether it has the quality to stand by itself as a work of art separate from the Mann name is questionable. Which can be said about many of his novels. I am sure Klaus knew this which is why his life was so sad.

I'd better point out that while it is theoretically history the book would not impress a modern historian and really is more a queer literary interest - as I have shelved it - but also shelved it as biography though whether it is a biography of Alexander or a concealed one of Klaus is for the reader to decide.

[ALEARDO ZANGHELLINI · Rating 2 out of 5]

The best thing about this book is the wonderful preface by Jean Cocteau. If you love Mary Renault's Alexander, you'll probably resent Mann's version of the story of Alexander very much (I sure did, in places, particularly the phobic treatment of 'the ermaphrodite', 'the creature', 'the child' Bagoas). Leaving that aside (I grant you that Renault's and Mann's treatments are so different that it really makes little sense to compare them) -- Mann's novel does have a few inspired and even beautiful moments, but they flash all too intermittently in what is otherwise an oddly told tale (the narrative register seems quite uneven, and for no particular reason) with underdeveloped characterisation, which also lays it on quite thickly. The English translation I read was atrocious: clunky, with ill-fitting word-choices, and commas all over the place. So, that possibly contributes to my impressions about the book.

[Panssj · Rating 5 out of 5]

Sebbene il mio cuore appartenga a "Il Ragazzo Persiano" (Mary Renault) per l'interpretazione della figura di Alessandro, ho apprezzato molto questa visione di lui non come semi-dio amato dalle folle, ma quasi un anti-eroe che ricerca vanamente qualcosa di indefinito (e che nessuno capisce), solo, isolato dagli altri e autodistruttivo. Consigliata la lettura!

[آبگینه · Rating 5 out of 5]

این کتاب رو با ترجمه‌ی محمود حدادی از نشر نیماژ خریدم و خیلی راضی‌ام. بهش باز خواهم گشت.

[Simon · Rating 4 out of 5]

I read this short novel about Alexander the Great in English translation by David Carter. It tells the familiar story of Alexander's youth, rise to power, spectacular conquest of the Persian empire and premature death in Babylon. Unusually, Klaus Mann frankly acknowledges Alexander's homosexuality (unlike the heterosexist spin of so many portrayals of his life), and explores his flawed personality. It is saddening to see him become a ruthless and murderous dictator in the style of Hitler, Stalin or Putin (prescient in a novel written in 1929). I particularly liked Mann's inventiveness in making Clitus tell the story of Gilgamesh as the provocation for Alexander's murder of him, as he is forced to compare his own fate with that of the tragic king of Uruk. Mann's handling of the Indian phase of Alexander's expedition reads like a 1960s LSD induced transcendental trip. However, the book was spoiled for me by the translation: quite apart from inexcusable mistakes and inconsistencies in the spellings of names, again and again David Carter's English was clumsy and odd - as if he had been influenced by the idiom of the original German text. Nevertheless, I found this a refreshingly different and tragic take on the life of Alexander, a troubled and lonely leader who killed the men he loved.

[La Pasión Inútil · Rating 4 out of 5]

Ciñéndose a la biografía objetiva de Alejandro, Klaus Mann elabora una narración que recorre la vida del más ilustre de los macedonios desde su niñez hasta su muerte. El texto da mucho espacio a la convergencia de doctrinas religiosas que Alejandro heredó de sí madre y cómo estas fueron decisivas para su afán de conquistar Asia y África. Sin duda un relato sugestivo y lleno de temas para destacar.

[Susana · Rating 4 out of 5]

Nicht vergleichbar mit Werken wie „Mephisto“, „Der Vulkan“ und „Treffpunkt im Unendlichen“ und leider auch ein anderer Schreibstil. Ignoriert man die Tatsache, dass Klaus Mann deutlich bessere Bücher geschrieben hat, ist es ein guter Roman, in dessen Zentrum die Entwicklung eines beliebten Eroberers zu einem grausamen Despoten steht.

[Gaydon Phillips · Rating 4 out of 5]

A classic. Not necessarily the easiest of reads to start with , especially as I’ve taken so long to finish. It’s been so hard to concentrate properly with The pandemic.

A heady mixture of a book, which I did enjoy.

[David C Ward · Rating 2 out of 5]

World conquest and mythic origins as camp. A lot of inadvertent comedy: “You can never have too many mothers.” A study on how tyrants are made (power corrupts. . .) and interesting really only as an example of mid 20th century “Orientalism”: the corrupt perfume of the decadent east….

[Donald · Rating 4 out of 5]

A very well written book yet still entertaining.

[Maddox23 · Rating 2 out of 5]

This book was a difficult one. Parts of it were enjoyable, and I only wish all of the book was written in the same style as these enjoyable parts, as I found most of it dull.

[Mora Ruscitti]

i love fanfiction

[Grady Ormsby · Rating 3 out of 5]

Alexander by Klaus Mann is historical fiction with a large dose of creativity and imagination. If you are looking for sources of scholarly research, you need to go somewhere else. History usually begins with a factual framework that can be documented and proven. Sometimes the strictly objective facts are supplemented with a blend of speculation, rumor and outright lies. Mann did not seem to be shy about using large amounts of the latter. Mann had obviously done the proper research before writing the novel but his depiction of Alexander’s personality takes liberties outside the limits usually set by historians. Some of the events and chronologies are a bit distorted. Beyond history the reader is presented with a sort of personality study. Alexander is depicted as a narcissistic megalomaniac. His madness is complicated by the isolation inherent in his power. Outwardly assertive, decisive and self-assured, he is actually a bundle of doubt, uncertainty and fear. His inability to establish a personal relationship with anyone ultimately leads to his downfall. Klaus Mann, son of Nobel Prize Laureate Thomas Mann, is best known for his novel Mephisto, written in 1936. He died tragically and controversially in Cannes, France at the age of 42.

[David Grieve]

Interesting story but not well told. Most of it seems to be a synopsis as any action is completely glossed over. The continual references to Alexander's homosexuality and pederasty gets a bit tiresome as well. The notes say that on publication it wasn't met with much critical acclaim and frnakly I'm not surprised.

[Des · Rating 4 out of 5]

The language and structure is neither riveting nor convincing, but the storyline carries one along Alexanders life. Not a masterpiece but a fast moving story on his life.

[Ian · Rating 1 out of 5]

wenn ich k. mann nicht so interessant durch seine zwei autobiografien und polititschen texte finden würde, hätte ich diese buch ab der dritten seite abgebrochen.

ich kenn mich nicht mit griechischer mythologie oder mazedonischer geschichtsschreibung aus. was das an geht, kann ich also nichts zu dem buch sagen.

was ich aber sagen kann ist, dass der deutsche sprachgebrauch um 1929 klar zu erkennen ist.
so viel diskriminierungen durch die sprache und die darstellung von figuren in diesem buch ist schon fast erstaunlich. nenne mir eine diskriminierungsform und ich kann dir mindest 3 stellen in dem buch zeigen in dem sie vorkommt. und nicht als kritik, sondern als wahrheit.
schon allein die überzeugung vom äußeren erscheinungsbild auf den charakter eines menschen schließen zu können und dabei blond sein z.b. mit reinheit gleichzusetzten, reicht vlt. als beispiel.

ganz persönlich für mich habe ich es zuende gelesen, da ich mir einen überblick über das gesamtwerk von klaus mann verschaffen möcht. also purer persönlicher ehrgeiz :)...