I believe that this site offers a valuable opportunity to have an informative discussion on Hesse's works.

Any thoughts on this work?

(Please don't be afraid to speak up!)

Knulp, in my opinion, as far as a work standing on its own merits, is not an intellectually rich work as his other works. However, philosophically speaking, I think it is interesting that Hesse would devote an entire work on the subject of personal/whimsical liberation. And in conjunction with Hesse's life -as one who never really stopped but one who kept to 'the stages'- I think Knulp is very important. Somehow, some way, Knulp's life is legitimized by the very fact that he did what he wanted, or so one could interpret from the ending when he died alone and talking to God. However, how did Hesse fit such an existence into his chemes of living -the stages? (Why not do nothing and be a vegabond like Knulp, or why be like the Maigister?) I would suspect that Hesse would have attributed such inclinations to one's own instincts/one's calling. But certainly there were the same opposites in Hesse's life: On one hand he wanted to pursue his internal world, but then he also got married several times and had children... And he hid from the world and lived in almost complete isolation, but then he answered every fan letter with great care.

But... The opposites expressed by Hesse might have changed at the completion of the Glass Bead Game, when he realized that society (others) had become more important than the individual. And so at that point Hesse might have changed his opinion about Knulp's vagabond life... How much or in what way? I'm not sure what Hesse would say.

Just my two Pesos.
--Duke

I'm not sure it's safe to associate Knulp's life w/ Hesse's life. Knulp is, after all, a character. He's not necessarily a representation of Hesse per se. I have several friends who live today much like Knulp did, wandering the globe as vagabonds.

Having said this, I do I see Knulp, in a sense, analogous to Hesse the writer. Knulp knows the stories, in the case of the burgher and his wife, Knulp knows both sides of the story effectively authoring a third person narrative. He has a kind of omniscience similar to that of an author. Also, a writer is often alone writing and the process itself is akin to Knulp's wanderings, while the life of the burgher may be representative of the writer's domestic life. I guess, too, that Hesse, like many of us, see Knulp's life as simply idyllic (regardless of whether we're deluding ourselves or not). I don't know what Hesse's life was like when he wrote this book, but he might have felt he was at a crossroads faced with the choice of pursuing the life of a poet or that of a husband. Maybe someone better informed out there can follow up.

Knulp's death scene may have been inluenced by Eastern thought as well as playing up that old line, "We all die alone." There's a kind of coming to terms with yourself before death that's prevalent in Eastern and Western thought (last rites, confession, Tibetan Book of the Dead, whatnot). Knulp's parting is touching, and yet, I'd imagine the critics would call it sentimental (i.e. simplistic).

A wonderful little book, though I would agree it is not particularly intellectual. Still, it touches upon the individual's role in society and Hesse is great working w/ similar character archetypes (Siddharta, Demian, Harry Hallar). If youl like this kind of stuff from Hesse, I suggest reading the early novels of Knut Hamsun; Mysteries, Pan, Victoria, Hunger.