What do you think?
Rate this book
Crowds and Power
Crowds and Power is a revolutionary work in which Elias Canetti finds a new way of looking at human history and psychology.
Breathtaking in its range and erudition, it explores Shiite festivals and the English Civil war, the finger exercises of monkeys and the effects of inflation in Weimar Germany. In this study of the interplay of crowds, Canetti offers one of the most profound and startling portraits of the human condition.
Breathtaking in its range and erudition, it explores Shiite festivals and the English Civil war, the finger exercises of monkeys and the effects of inflation in Weimar Germany. In this study of the interplay of crowds, Canetti offers one of the most profound and startling portraits of the human condition.
495 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1960
437 people are currently reading
10.9k people want to read
About the author
Elias Canetti
115Ìýbooks641ÌýfollowersAwarded the 1981 Nobel Prize in Literature "for writings marked by a broad outlook, a wealth of ideas and artistic power."
He studied in Vienna. Before World War II he moved with his wife Veza to England and stayed there for long time. Since late 1960s he lived in London and Zurich. In late 1980s he started to live in Zurich permanently. He died in 1994 in Zurich.
Author of ´¡³Ü³Ù´Ç-»å²¹-¹óé, Party in the Blitz, Crowds and Power, and The Voices of Marrakesh: A Record of a Visit
He studied in Vienna. Before World War II he moved with his wife Veza to England and stayed there for long time. Since late 1960s he lived in London and Zurich. In late 1980s he started to live in Zurich permanently. He died in 1994 in Zurich.
Author of ´¡³Ü³Ù´Ç-»å²¹-¹óé, Party in the Blitz, Crowds and Power, and The Voices of Marrakesh: A Record of a Visit
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 173 reviews
August 8, 2019
The Future Belongs to Crowds
An astounding book. It reads like a series of essays by Montaigne but all directed toward the phenomenon of human organisation. Each essay, which might include references as diverse as the anthropology of South American tribes to the history of European warfare, contains some comment which is not only arresting but revelatory of profound insight. Who knew that an apparently sociological treatise could be so creative, so enthralling, so literate? Crowds and Power is also something like Dr Johnson's dictionary. It shows Canetti's pet-peeves and prejudices as well as his erudition.
Canetti's world is one composed of human groups rather than words, but his achievement is to describe these groups and their dynamics as had never been done before. His unit of analysis is the crowd, which may arise from something more primitive called a pack, but which takes on uniquely crowd-like characteristics and force. The crowd, depending on its type, of which there are several, has an implicit crowd-mind, not dissimilar perhaps from the hive-mind of bees (or ten-year old girls).Ìý
After establishing his basic crowd-typology, Canetti presents page after page of remarkable observations and conclusions about what makes each type behave as it does. Only a few of his crowds could be termed mobs. Most are institutionalised, or 'closed', crowds, the primary issue of which is to prevent them becoming anything like a mob, which is 'open'. Prototypical of an institutionalised crowd is religion. Religions 'domesticate' crowds through precisely controlled ritual. Congregants must be united but not excited enough to press for too rapid expansion nor irritated enough by its demands to provoke departure. Consequently: "Their feeling of unity is dispensed to them in doses and the continuation of the church depends on the rightness of the dosage."
Parliamentary crowds, that is democratically elected Party-affiliated representatives, are an example in a modern form of bloodless warfare. Parliamentary crowds are only possible because the losers in democratic election are not killed or physically harmed. This is the reason, of course, that Trump’s threat to prosecute Clinton during the American election campaign was implicitly treasonous. It was a threat not just to Clinton but to the essential conditions of elected government. The very solemnity with which elections are conducted, argues Canetti, derives from the renunciation of death an instrument of decision.
His discussion of National Crowd Symbols is presented almost as an aside but is particularly thought-provoking. Some are obvious once stated: the Sea for England, Barriers Against the Sea in The Netherlands, the Mountains for Switzerland. But one tends to forget that these are far more than clichés. They have an emotional significance that is real (the last night of the Proms comes to mind, as does the role of the Dijkgraaf in the political unity of Holland). Others are less apparent but of very practical historical import. For example, the Marching Forest of the Army in Germany, a symbol of pan-Germanic strength and unity created by Bismarck was fatally disgraced by the Treaty of Versailles. It is Canetti's not uninformed view that "Hitler would never have come to power if the crowd of the army had not been prohibited by Versailles."
Like Dr Johnson, Canetti inserts more than one or two private prejudices into his analyses. Islam, he believes, is inherently a religion of continuous warfare as indicated by selections from the Quran. But similar references in the Christian and Hebrew Bible are not quoted. Christianity is a 'crowd of lament' for a slain god, and thus one in a line that stretches from the Babylonian cult of Tammuz to the various mysticisms of the Australian aborigines. This is an interesting hypothesis which has been articulated elsewhere but with neither discussion nor additional confirming material in Crowds and Power.
Canetti's final chapters on the use of power within crowds, to manipulate and lead them, are less satisfactory than his analysis of, as it were, naked crowd dynamics. But even here his insights are at least as provocative and stimulating as most organisational theorists today. His definition of the 'increase crowd' which is crystallised around an associated 'increase pack' is not an irrelevant way to view modern corporate organisations. Given its date of publication (1960), Crowds and Power is a rather sophisticated appreciation of organisation compared with the puerile discussions of such topics as 'Authority Structure' and 'Line vs. Staff' that were common in the mainstream academic discussion of the day.
Crowds and Power is a refreshing look at how human beings act in groups. Refreshing because after almost six decades this inter-disciplinary work has never found a disciplinary home in the social sciences and consequently never has been turned into countless doctoral theses and academic articles. It is a phenomenology not a sociological study. The obvious point of Crowds and Power is to escape from the tacit, largely unexamined presumptions and categories of social scientific thought. It remains therefore suggestive, if not inspirational. But very few social scientists would dare cite it to their colleagues. It breaks the rate, as it were, in both creativity and literacy and so is ignored.
An astounding book. It reads like a series of essays by Montaigne but all directed toward the phenomenon of human organisation. Each essay, which might include references as diverse as the anthropology of South American tribes to the history of European warfare, contains some comment which is not only arresting but revelatory of profound insight. Who knew that an apparently sociological treatise could be so creative, so enthralling, so literate? Crowds and Power is also something like Dr Johnson's dictionary. It shows Canetti's pet-peeves and prejudices as well as his erudition.
Canetti's world is one composed of human groups rather than words, but his achievement is to describe these groups and their dynamics as had never been done before. His unit of analysis is the crowd, which may arise from something more primitive called a pack, but which takes on uniquely crowd-like characteristics and force. The crowd, depending on its type, of which there are several, has an implicit crowd-mind, not dissimilar perhaps from the hive-mind of bees (or ten-year old girls).Ìý
After establishing his basic crowd-typology, Canetti presents page after page of remarkable observations and conclusions about what makes each type behave as it does. Only a few of his crowds could be termed mobs. Most are institutionalised, or 'closed', crowds, the primary issue of which is to prevent them becoming anything like a mob, which is 'open'. Prototypical of an institutionalised crowd is religion. Religions 'domesticate' crowds through precisely controlled ritual. Congregants must be united but not excited enough to press for too rapid expansion nor irritated enough by its demands to provoke departure. Consequently: "Their feeling of unity is dispensed to them in doses and the continuation of the church depends on the rightness of the dosage."
Parliamentary crowds, that is democratically elected Party-affiliated representatives, are an example in a modern form of bloodless warfare. Parliamentary crowds are only possible because the losers in democratic election are not killed or physically harmed. This is the reason, of course, that Trump’s threat to prosecute Clinton during the American election campaign was implicitly treasonous. It was a threat not just to Clinton but to the essential conditions of elected government. The very solemnity with which elections are conducted, argues Canetti, derives from the renunciation of death an instrument of decision.
His discussion of National Crowd Symbols is presented almost as an aside but is particularly thought-provoking. Some are obvious once stated: the Sea for England, Barriers Against the Sea in The Netherlands, the Mountains for Switzerland. But one tends to forget that these are far more than clichés. They have an emotional significance that is real (the last night of the Proms comes to mind, as does the role of the Dijkgraaf in the political unity of Holland). Others are less apparent but of very practical historical import. For example, the Marching Forest of the Army in Germany, a symbol of pan-Germanic strength and unity created by Bismarck was fatally disgraced by the Treaty of Versailles. It is Canetti's not uninformed view that "Hitler would never have come to power if the crowd of the army had not been prohibited by Versailles."
Like Dr Johnson, Canetti inserts more than one or two private prejudices into his analyses. Islam, he believes, is inherently a religion of continuous warfare as indicated by selections from the Quran. But similar references in the Christian and Hebrew Bible are not quoted. Christianity is a 'crowd of lament' for a slain god, and thus one in a line that stretches from the Babylonian cult of Tammuz to the various mysticisms of the Australian aborigines. This is an interesting hypothesis which has been articulated elsewhere but with neither discussion nor additional confirming material in Crowds and Power.
Canetti's final chapters on the use of power within crowds, to manipulate and lead them, are less satisfactory than his analysis of, as it were, naked crowd dynamics. But even here his insights are at least as provocative and stimulating as most organisational theorists today. His definition of the 'increase crowd' which is crystallised around an associated 'increase pack' is not an irrelevant way to view modern corporate organisations. Given its date of publication (1960), Crowds and Power is a rather sophisticated appreciation of organisation compared with the puerile discussions of such topics as 'Authority Structure' and 'Line vs. Staff' that were common in the mainstream academic discussion of the day.
Crowds and Power is a refreshing look at how human beings act in groups. Refreshing because after almost six decades this inter-disciplinary work has never found a disciplinary home in the social sciences and consequently never has been turned into countless doctoral theses and academic articles. It is a phenomenology not a sociological study. The obvious point of Crowds and Power is to escape from the tacit, largely unexamined presumptions and categories of social scientific thought. It remains therefore suggestive, if not inspirational. But very few social scientists would dare cite it to their colleagues. It breaks the rate, as it were, in both creativity and literacy and so is ignored.
January 18, 2025
That work took its author more than twenty years to complete. Instead, he discussed mass phenomena in sociology, which were crucial in the first decades of the twentieth century and studied by philosophers and early psychoanalysts in the four corners of Europe (and probably elsewhere).
Canetti, precisely, is one of the first, like Ortega y Gasset, and, while living in the same city of Vienna as Dr. Freud - whom he seems to hate - he can produce an essay of some 600 p. in pure 18th-century style, without caring the least for the new science of the unconscious.
Canetti, precisely, is one of the first, like Ortega y Gasset, and, while living in the same city of Vienna as Dr. Freud - whom he seems to hate - he can produce an essay of some 600 p. in pure 18th-century style, without caring the least for the new science of the unconscious.
May 10, 2023
Cum să fie cea mai importantă carte a lui Elias Canetti (1905-1994)? Cea mai ambițioasă? Firește. Dar în nici un caz cea mai bună...
„Nimic nu ne înfricoșează mai tare decît atingerea necunoscutului�.
După ce publică în 1935, Die Blendung, Orbirea, un roman uriaș (în toate sensurile), Elias Canetti începe subit să creadă că vocația lui este cu totul alta decît aceea de prozator. Ca atare, renunță aproape complet la proza de ficțiune, scrie teatru fără mare efect, publicul îl va prefera pe Beckett. În același timp, nutrește convingerea bizară că este, în fond, un gînditor viguros din stirpea lui Aristotel (cf. Politica) și începe să adune silitor un material foarte compozit pentru o carte de filosofie, Masse und Macht, Masele și puterea, pe care o va publica în 1960.
„Este opera vieții mele�, va mărturisi candid uneia dintre amantele sale, pictorița Marie-Louise von Motesiczky, într-o epistolă. Am descifrat „mecanismele puterii, am adus tuturor lumina, nimeni n-a mai reușit asta, sînt un zeu…�. Și încă: �Nu există astăzi o minte mai cuprinzătoare decît a mea. Sînt cel mai inteligent dintre contemporani. Nici un filosof n-a gîndit mai profund decît mine. Trebuie să fii mîndră că mă iubești�.
N-am nici o îndoială că Marie-Louise a fost foarte mîndră, dar asta nu i-a folosit capriciosului prozator l-a nimic..
Din păcate, Masele și puterea reprezintă, franc spus, cartea unui diletant, a unui amator entuziast. Nici un filosof politic, nici un psiholog al mulțimilor nu l-a luat vreodată în serios. Canetti însuși pare conștient de neajunsurile lucrării sale.
„Oricît ar părea de completă multora [cercetarea de față], multe probleme n-au fost atinse decît în treacăt, iar altele, importante, încă nu au fost atinse şi nu vom putea să-i luăm în nume de rău cititorului faptul că doreşte acum, la sfîrşitul acestei cărţi, să rămînă cu nişte certitudini...�.
P. S. Prin ambiție și dorința de a epuiza un subiect, lucrarea lui Elias Canetti mi-a amintit de Creanga de aur a lui James George Frazer (1854-1941). Canetti a adunat un material imens pe care n-a reușit să-l organizeze convingător.
„Nimic nu ne înfricoșează mai tare decît atingerea necunoscutului�.
După ce publică în 1935, Die Blendung, Orbirea, un roman uriaș (în toate sensurile), Elias Canetti începe subit să creadă că vocația lui este cu totul alta decît aceea de prozator. Ca atare, renunță aproape complet la proza de ficțiune, scrie teatru fără mare efect, publicul îl va prefera pe Beckett. În același timp, nutrește convingerea bizară că este, în fond, un gînditor viguros din stirpea lui Aristotel (cf. Politica) și începe să adune silitor un material foarte compozit pentru o carte de filosofie, Masse und Macht, Masele și puterea, pe care o va publica în 1960.
„Este opera vieții mele�, va mărturisi candid uneia dintre amantele sale, pictorița Marie-Louise von Motesiczky, într-o epistolă. Am descifrat „mecanismele puterii, am adus tuturor lumina, nimeni n-a mai reușit asta, sînt un zeu…�. Și încă: �Nu există astăzi o minte mai cuprinzătoare decît a mea. Sînt cel mai inteligent dintre contemporani. Nici un filosof n-a gîndit mai profund decît mine. Trebuie să fii mîndră că mă iubești�.
N-am nici o îndoială că Marie-Louise a fost foarte mîndră, dar asta nu i-a folosit capriciosului prozator l-a nimic..
Din păcate, Masele și puterea reprezintă, franc spus, cartea unui diletant, a unui amator entuziast. Nici un filosof politic, nici un psiholog al mulțimilor nu l-a luat vreodată în serios. Canetti însuși pare conștient de neajunsurile lucrării sale.
„Oricît ar părea de completă multora [cercetarea de față], multe probleme n-au fost atinse decît în treacăt, iar altele, importante, încă nu au fost atinse şi nu vom putea să-i luăm în nume de rău cititorului faptul că doreşte acum, la sfîrşitul acestei cărţi, să rămînă cu nişte certitudini...�.
P. S. Prin ambiție și dorința de a epuiza un subiect, lucrarea lui Elias Canetti mi-a amintit de Creanga de aur a lui James George Frazer (1854-1941). Canetti a adunat un material imens pe care n-a reușit să-l organizeze convingător.
February 20, 2025
Nobel Prize in Literature 1981
English translation:
Canetti started working on his opus magnum in 1922, it was published in 1960 - what a time frame to investigate mass psychology and authoritarianism. The Nobel Prize winner gives extensive references to describe the nature of masses and how they behave, then relating them to the power of leaders. In the more controversial parts, he compares the irrational, affect-driven phenomena displayed by masses to schizophrenia () or delirium tremens. Another often discussed passage ponders the gruesome regime of .
The whole thing is stylistically experimental: Not a novel, not a scientific study, and with more than 500 pages certainly not an essay. It's an investigation into psychology, history, sociology, anthropology, cultural history, etc. pp. More than anything it's the reflection of a long thought process about mass-driven cruelty, a phenomenon that dominated the 20th century and its ideologies. As such, it's daring and fascinating, but let's be real: It's also a lot of work, and not intended to be easily accessible. It frequently has a labyrinthical quality and requires readers who have the guts to just enter at the risk of getting lost, again and again.
English translation:
Canetti started working on his opus magnum in 1922, it was published in 1960 - what a time frame to investigate mass psychology and authoritarianism. The Nobel Prize winner gives extensive references to describe the nature of masses and how they behave, then relating them to the power of leaders. In the more controversial parts, he compares the irrational, affect-driven phenomena displayed by masses to schizophrenia () or delirium tremens. Another often discussed passage ponders the gruesome regime of .
The whole thing is stylistically experimental: Not a novel, not a scientific study, and with more than 500 pages certainly not an essay. It's an investigation into psychology, history, sociology, anthropology, cultural history, etc. pp. More than anything it's the reflection of a long thought process about mass-driven cruelty, a phenomenon that dominated the 20th century and its ideologies. As such, it's daring and fascinating, but let's be real: It's also a lot of work, and not intended to be easily accessible. It frequently has a labyrinthical quality and requires readers who have the guts to just enter at the risk of getting lost, again and again.
September 23, 2014
Elias Canetti, the Nobel Prize-winning author of this book, would be unhappy to learn that he's now best known as Iris Murdoch's one-time lover. I had heard that he was the prototype of the diabolical Julius King in A Fairly Honourable Defeat, and I'd also read various lurid accounts of their affair. Among other things, Canetti's wife used to greet Murdoch with a smile when she turned up for their trysts and then make lunch for all of them afterwards; as you can see, a cult leader kind of personality. So I was curious to find out more about him, and, when Sherwood recommended Crowds and Power in the middle of a discussion thread last month, I went out and ordered a copy.
The rest of this review is available elsewhere (the location cannot be given for Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ policy reasons)
The rest of this review is available elsewhere (the location cannot be given for Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ policy reasons)
July 13, 2019
Here's a quote to remember :" That’s what makes an unanswered question so powerful. Silence is a form of armor, a barrier that repels the questioner’s arrow-like queries. Power loves secrecy, and secrecy is vital to the exercise of power."
#Reading
#Reading
December 18, 2015
This is utter bullsht, or rather I should say I wholeheartedly believe it to be so. Because this is what annoys me to no end about books and people in general, when they present their obviously biased and very subjective opinions as the absolute truth emitted by the other worldy authority that they believe they are. To me, this is mister Canetti presenting his elaborate, pretentious, shallow, completely unsupported by research theories about crowds in the most patronizing and infurating way I've seen in a long time. I'd liken it to somebody describing in great detail the mating habits of deep sea creatures after having only heard faint second-hand stories about them. He goes on and on with his pointless classifications and anectodes about exotic, remote cultures and their barbaric ways, the style is tedious and hard to follow, I really couldn't find any idea of value and stopped after skimming about a quorter of the way through, at the chapter where Islam is the religion of war and Christianity that of lament, but there was more to learn about the exact characteristics, mostly flaws of course, of several nations, including "the jews". I can't event remember why I ever thought I wanted to read this, I guess I expected something about the psychology of crowds, not one guy's opinion spewed from his high horse of elaborate nothingness. Rant over.
July 17, 2017
Canetti is a genius. The chapter on power and violence should be a must read for every aspiring politician (not to mention the ones already in office).
February 3, 2019
Scrissi di là il 21/08/15 ma continuo a rileggerlo
Se vi aspettate una fenomenologia della massa o le implicazioni sociologico-filosofiche del potere o gli arrovellamenti morali e/o etici sulla persistenza del male nell’uomo (tutta roba che si distingue per il mantra di nozioni di cui si è persa la fonte e che traggono la loro autorevolezza appunto dalla ripetitività ), Canetti non è il vostro autore.
E se c’� un testo che sbeffeggi, riduca in poltiglia e getti ai porci le finte perle freudiane dell’io e le masse o la ‘scoperta� dell’essenza della paranoia che, guarda caso, è figlia primogenita dei rigurgiti libidinosi di gonadi malfunzionanti di un certo Schreber (biografo della sua follia)�, è proprio Massa e Potere.
E se c’� un autore che abbia fatto strame in una botta di iperspecialisti antropologi, sociologi, psicologi e filosofi questo è Canetti che, non a caso, è stato rubricato, da questi giudici austeri e militanti severi, come scrittore tout court. Ma non sono i poeti che, come dice Lacan, ci introducono a una nuova dimensione dell’esperienza?
Se c’� uno "sguardo" che dimostra irrevocabilmente come "l'ontogenesi ricapitoli la filogenesi�, ed è quello di cui andate in cerca: accomodatevi.
Lui ‘cosa� violentemente l’insondabile complessità della psiche umana, riducendola ad una animalità filogeneticamente inconfutabile: la sopravvivenza legata a doppio filo all’annientamento del maggior numero di competitor possibili. Sopravvivenza nell’accezione di vivere sopra gli altri, dominare gli altri, uccidere gli altri e nutrirsi di loro. Non siamo ognuno di noi dei sopravvissuti nella lotta senza quartiere con milioni di spermatozoi, sui cui ‘cadaverini� abbiamo troneggiato raggiungendo la meta?
Tutto inizia nella notte dei tempi in cui esigui gruppetti di ominidi vagano in preda alla paura delle belve, che li spinge a stringersi fisicamente tra loro, in cristalli di massa, aggregamenti primordiali delle masse.
E poiché non voglio rompervi i cabbasisi con un trattatello di banalità , azzardo, a mo� di esemplificazione (che Canetti mi perdoni), di immaginarci sospesi tra quei pochi indimenticabili minuti del “The Dawn of Man�, incipit di 2001 Odissea nello Spazio (parte dedicata alla genesi della massa); o rinchiusi nella cella di isolamento con Renfield, il folle zoofago cumulativo di ‘Dracula il Vampiro� di Bram Stoker : crede che più anime ingerirà più vivrà a lungo e più acquisterà meriti agli occhi del suo signore e padrone, Dracula, ( parte dedicata al potere con l’equazione morte =potere=paranoia esemplificata nel caso Scherber).
L’intuizione di un ominide dell’uso di un femore di carcassa animale come arma contundente è all’origine dell’inscindibile coppia massa/potere, in cui il potere è quello di vita o di morte di un singolo o di una muta sulle masse consenzienti.
L’antropologo Canetti ne rintraccia le orme inconfutabili nelle culture degli aborigeni australiani, nelle tribù primitive dell’Africa subsahariana e in quelle amazzoniche, teorizzando una biopolitica delle masse e del potere alla base di tutte le civiltà che si sono succedute in milioni di anni. Un percorso che arriva quasi immutato ai nostri giorni, in cui il ‘quasi� è da attribuire alle capacità di metamorfosi proprie dell’uomo che, con l’uso di maschere, può ingannare per sopravvivere alla minaccia (se è un sottoposto) o per mantenere il potere (se è il potente).
"L’errore spaventoso sta nell’espressione ‘l’uomo� - dice Canetti - l’uomo non è un’unità : contiene in sé tutto ciò che ha violentato. Tutti gli uomini lo contengono, ma non in ugual misura; possono quindi farsi l’un l’altro il peggio. Hanno la caparbietà e la forza per giungere allo sterminio totale".
Se il potere è sopravvivenza, la sua forma più “bassa� e violenta, ma anche più diffusa tra noi umani, consiste nell’uccidere: l’uomo è un animale pericoloso (Hobbes) «vuole uccidere per sopravvivere agli altri». La “schiavitù della morte è il nocciolo di ogni schiavitù�. È la minaccia di morte a rendere possibile l’esercizio del potere: è perché sa, o sente, di poter essere ucciso da un altro essere umano, che l’uomo gli si sottomette.
L’antropologia canettiana del potere tiene conto, però, della storia. Nella modernità , la sovranità non sparisce ma si trasforma : “non si tratta più (o non solo) di infliggere a capriccio la condanna capitale, ma � dopo averlo nutrito, ingrassato e ingrandito a dismisura � di mandare al macello il popolo-massa, per potergli sopravvivere�. A chi subisce o accetta il potere si promette, come ricompensa, un po� di vita � un ragionevole, quasi godibile rinvio della morte-. Come Dracula con Rensfield o Dio con Schreber, che si trasforma in donna per essere amato dal supremo illudendosi di poterlo dominare. Già , perché anche il potente sopravvissuto ha la sua spina: quello di essere annientato dall’ultimo sopravvissuto. Vive nel terrore.
La cosiddetta modernità ha sotterrato, come fa istintivamente il gatto, i suoi escrementi sotto un sottile strato di ghiaietta: i parlamenti da cui è bandita la morte. Ma basta grattare un poco che il marciume torna a galla, marciume impresso profondamente nel nostro paleoncefalo, costituito da cellule e da sinapsi e non dall’inconoscibile subconscio e dove alberga il mostro della paranoia che, in condizioni date, può mostrarsi nuda e cruda nella follia conclamata o sotto forma di potere nel reale.
Ogni potente agisce sulla massa la sua paranoia perché in essa, come dimostra il caso Scherber*o il folle di Stocker, sono rappresentati tutti gli organi del potere, tutte le peculiarità del sopravvissuto compreso il delirio d’onnipotenza e tutti gli elementi del potere: l’accrescimento e l’immortalità conseguita con l’annientamento dei viventi individuati nei nemici e nei sodali sopravvissuti all’inadempimento, reale o pretestuoso, del comando da lui impartito. “Le memorie di un malato di nervi� sono la dimostrazione scientifica della sua, a prima vista, azzardata ipotesi: il potente e il paranoico, etichettato clinicamente come tale, sono le due facce della stessa medaglia. Solo le circostanze storico ambientali ne permettono l’una o l’altra espressione. E nessuno di noi è immune. Il potere slaterizza il paranoico che è in noi.
Comunque, dice Canetti, nella contemporaneità l’unica massa sopravvissuta è quella dell’accrescimento: se c’� una fede di cui diventano preda l’un dopo l’altro i popoli è la fede nella produzione, il moderno furore dell’accrescimento. Per vendere, la produzione necessita di un numero sempre maggiore di uomini. Le masse di guerra non vogliono più uccidersi a vicenda ma superarsi a vicenda. L’oriente e l’occidente sono due enormi masse doppie. La Germania nazista fu l’ultima, per Canetti, ad usare la guerra come mezzo per un rapido accrescimento.
Il saggio è pubblicato negli anni sessanta quando la corsa al nucleare ha trasformato il delirio di sopravvivenza del potente in un cupio dissolvi che ha disinnescato, suo malgrado, il detonatore del potere di morte reciproco sulla massa avversaria e trasformandolo nella suprema e insopportabile sconfitta che è, per il potente, il suicidio.
L’orribile periodo da lui vissuto è ormai passato e anche le religioni si davano per morte. Che ne poteva sapere Canetti del revival dell’islam integralista, religione di guerra come lui l’aveva definita, in piena attività di delirio di potenza?
Alla profonda e per certi versi terrorizzante analisi, proprio alla fine segue un’esortazione a che la massa estirpi definitivamente la spina del comando del potere: se si vuole riuscire ad aggredire il potere si deve guardare negli occhi senza timore il comando e trovare i mezzi per sottrargli la sua spina.
In parole povere, ognuno deve indagare dentro la propria paranoia, affrontando la paura e rifiutando il comando di fuga dentro una massa, estirpando il desiderio di sopprimere o di servirsi degli altri per rimanere l’ultimo, il sopravvissuto. L’amore non basta, dice il prosaico antiromantico Canetti.
Conclusione troppo frettolosa, tanto per dire qualcosa? L’unico appunto che mi sento di fargli.
* “Il caso Schreber, noto soprattutto perché analizzato da Freud nel 1910, è oggetto di un’ampia revisione con lo scopo non tanto nel confutare indirettamente l’interpretazione psicoanalitica del delirio di Schreber � poiché è evidente il carattere riduttivo della chiave ‘omosessuale� utilizzata da Freud a fronte della ricchezza di questo delirio � , quanto nel mostrare la natura politica della paranoia dell’ex giudice tedesco. La sua follia, sotto il travestimento di un’antichissima visione del mondo che presuppone l’esistenza di spiriti, è in realtà il preciso modello del potere politico che si nutre della massa e da essa è costituito�. Nell’Anti-Edipo, Deleuze e Guattari hanno riconosciuto a Canetti il merito di aver sottratto la paranoia, “malattia di potere�, ad ogni “imperialismo dell’Edipo�.
June 19, 2024
Es kann keinem Zweifel unterliegen, daß der Mensch, sobald er es einmal war, mehr sein wollte.
In seinem philosophischen Hauptwerk, an dem er über zwanzig Jahre gearbeitet hat, untersucht Elias Canetti gruppendynamische Prozesse und Machtstrukturen. Der historische Kontext reicht dabei bis in die früheste Menschheitsgeschichte zurück. Canetti setzt an den Wurzeln der sozialen Entwicklung an, um zu erklären, wie es zu den schrecklichen Auswüchsen im 20. Jahrhunderts kommen konnte, deren Zeitzeuge er selber war. Deutlich wird, dass das menschliche Verhalten weitaus unveränderlicher ist als gemeinhin angenommen. Es wird von Triebkräften bestimmt, die über alle Zeiten wirksam sind und lediglich in wechselnder Form in Erscheinung treten.
Eine solches Grundprinzip des Menschseins ist zum Beispiel das Wachstum, oder wie es im Buch heißt die Vermehrung. Canetti sieht in der Vermehrungsmeute das folgen- und erfolgreichste Gebilde, das die Menschheit je hervorgebracht hat. Aus den Regentänzen der Stammesgesellschaften sind im Lauf der Jahrhunderte Maschinen und technische Prozesse geworden, die dem Kult unserer Moderne dienen, der Produktion. In diesem Sinne lassen sich viele der dargestellten Phänomene auf die Gegenwart übertragen. Die Masse ist nämlich auch in den hochindividualisierten, postmodernen Gesellschaften keineswegs verschwunden.
Eine eher harmlose Variante stellen etwa nervige Influencer auf Plattformen wie TikTok und Co. dar, deren Geschäftsmodell auf der Anhäufung von Followern zu einer virtuellen Masse beruht. Doch birgt jede Gruppenbildung eine gewisse Gefahr in sich. Wo Selbsterhöhung mit Erniedrigung der Anderen einhergeht, ist die Gewalt archaischer Hetz- und Kriegsmeuten nicht fern. Ein anschauliches Beispiel bietet der Krieg in der Ukraine. Im Grunde ein absurder Atavismus, treten dort doch zwei feindliche Heere in Gestalt der von Canetti skizzierten Doppelmasse des Krieges auf dem Schlachtfeld gegeneinander an, weil sich eine Nation seinen Nachbarn einverleiben möchte. Insofern kann Masse und Macht auch als an künftige Generationen gerichtete Warnung gelesen werden, obwohl das Buch in erster Linie als Auseinandersetzung mit den Ursachen des Faschismus gedacht war.
Nicht alles scheint mir ganz schlüssig zu sein. So fand ich u.a. den Abschnitt über die Massensymbole der Nationen als Rückgriff in die Mottenkiste der Völkerpsychologie. Was soll das heißen, jede Nation hätte ein spezifisches Symbol der Masse (auch Luxemburg? � dazu leider nichts). Für Deutschland wäre das Der marschierende Wald. Den verbinde ich eher mit Shakespeares Macbeth: “Fear not till Birnam Wood / Do come to Dunsinane, and now a wood / Comes toward Dunsinane.� Arm, arm, and out!—� Andererseits nicht verkehrt, entpricht der vom Borkenkäfer zerfressene deutsche Wald doch dem maroden Zustand der Bundeswehr.
Jedenfalls regt das Buch zum Nach- und Weiterdenken an, insbesondere wenn man die tribalistischen Tendenzen unserer Tage betrachet.
In seinem philosophischen Hauptwerk, an dem er über zwanzig Jahre gearbeitet hat, untersucht Elias Canetti gruppendynamische Prozesse und Machtstrukturen. Der historische Kontext reicht dabei bis in die früheste Menschheitsgeschichte zurück. Canetti setzt an den Wurzeln der sozialen Entwicklung an, um zu erklären, wie es zu den schrecklichen Auswüchsen im 20. Jahrhunderts kommen konnte, deren Zeitzeuge er selber war. Deutlich wird, dass das menschliche Verhalten weitaus unveränderlicher ist als gemeinhin angenommen. Es wird von Triebkräften bestimmt, die über alle Zeiten wirksam sind und lediglich in wechselnder Form in Erscheinung treten.
Eine solches Grundprinzip des Menschseins ist zum Beispiel das Wachstum, oder wie es im Buch heißt die Vermehrung. Canetti sieht in der Vermehrungsmeute das folgen- und erfolgreichste Gebilde, das die Menschheit je hervorgebracht hat. Aus den Regentänzen der Stammesgesellschaften sind im Lauf der Jahrhunderte Maschinen und technische Prozesse geworden, die dem Kult unserer Moderne dienen, der Produktion. In diesem Sinne lassen sich viele der dargestellten Phänomene auf die Gegenwart übertragen. Die Masse ist nämlich auch in den hochindividualisierten, postmodernen Gesellschaften keineswegs verschwunden.
Eine eher harmlose Variante stellen etwa nervige Influencer auf Plattformen wie TikTok und Co. dar, deren Geschäftsmodell auf der Anhäufung von Followern zu einer virtuellen Masse beruht. Doch birgt jede Gruppenbildung eine gewisse Gefahr in sich. Wo Selbsterhöhung mit Erniedrigung der Anderen einhergeht, ist die Gewalt archaischer Hetz- und Kriegsmeuten nicht fern. Ein anschauliches Beispiel bietet der Krieg in der Ukraine. Im Grunde ein absurder Atavismus, treten dort doch zwei feindliche Heere in Gestalt der von Canetti skizzierten Doppelmasse des Krieges auf dem Schlachtfeld gegeneinander an, weil sich eine Nation seinen Nachbarn einverleiben möchte. Insofern kann Masse und Macht auch als an künftige Generationen gerichtete Warnung gelesen werden, obwohl das Buch in erster Linie als Auseinandersetzung mit den Ursachen des Faschismus gedacht war.
Nicht alles scheint mir ganz schlüssig zu sein. So fand ich u.a. den Abschnitt über die Massensymbole der Nationen als Rückgriff in die Mottenkiste der Völkerpsychologie. Was soll das heißen, jede Nation hätte ein spezifisches Symbol der Masse (auch Luxemburg? � dazu leider nichts). Für Deutschland wäre das Der marschierende Wald. Den verbinde ich eher mit Shakespeares Macbeth: “Fear not till Birnam Wood / Do come to Dunsinane, and now a wood / Comes toward Dunsinane.� Arm, arm, and out!—� Andererseits nicht verkehrt, entpricht der vom Borkenkäfer zerfressene deutsche Wald doch dem maroden Zustand der Bundeswehr.
Jedenfalls regt das Buch zum Nach- und Weiterdenken an, insbesondere wenn man die tribalistischen Tendenzen unserer Tage betrachet.
March 1, 2025
Kitabı yeni bitirdim ve eğer şimdi bu kitapla ilgili birşeyler yazmazsam hiç yazamam diyerek oturdum bilgisayar başına. Kitapla ilgili en kısa söylenecek olan ''yoğun'' , ne var dersek sosyoloji, tarih, psikoloji, felsefe, antropoloji... bence en ağırlıklı sosyoji, toplum analizi var. Bu öyle hop okudum bitirdim denebilecek bir kitap değil, her sayfada bi duraksıyor insan, ağır gitmek gerekli (11günde okudum,dahada yavaş olsa daha iyi olurdu) hatta ortak kafada bir arkadaşınızla bölüm bölüm üstüne konuşarak okunsa daha güzel olur, kitap tam açmadı bana kapılarını, ikinci kez okunmalı diyerek ayırdım kitabı.
Benim Canetti ile ilgili asıl hedefim tek romanı olan Körleşmeyi okumak, öncesinde tarzına diline alışmak adına deneme tarzında iki kitabını seçtim, bu ve İnsanın taşrası.
Bu kitapla ilgili benim beklentim biraz farklıydı aslında, 2. Dünya savaşı, Nazizim sırasında Avrupa'da yaşamış, o medeniyetin bir çocuğu olarak yazardan beklentim yakın tarihe dair, kitlesel göç-kaçış, savaşla ilgili daha fazla bilgi edinmekti. Bu noktada istediğimi bulamasamda kitle kavramı, psikolojisi, iktidar analizi çok derinlikli bir eser. Kitabı okurken beni en zorlayan, boğan kısımları, ilkel kabilelerin ölüm, doğum, av savaş, dans, dinsel törenleri, yerlilerle ilgili hikayeler, mitoloji, efsane kısımları oldu. Hoşuma giden yerler, tekrar tekrar okuduğumda çokça kısım oldu; Kitle niteliklerini veriyor Canetti, dört tane -büyümek ister, daima eşitlik ister, yoğunluğu vardır, bir yöne gereksinim duyar- ve bunları açıklarken çok ilginç metaforlar kullanıyor, okyanus, dalgalar, ormanlar, dans-ayakların ritmi, çarpıcı bir kitle örneği arena... En beğendiğim bölüm Hayatta kalan ve Emir oldu, hayatta kalma anı iktidar anıdır diyor Canetti, soru soran iktidarı uygular, soru sormak zora dayalı müdaheledir, insanın özgürlüğü verilen her yanıtta kısıtlanıyor...
Çok yönlü bir kitap, benim için çok kolay bir okuma olmadı, ilgilisine meraklısına tavsiye edilir. Herkese keyifli okumalar.
Giriş; İnsanı, bilinmeyenin dokunuşundan daha çok korkutan hiçbir şey yoktur.
Hayatta kalma anı iktidar anıdır. Ölümün görüntüsü karşısında düşülen dehşet ölen bir başkası olduğundan tatmine dönüşür. Hayatta kalan ayakta dururken ölen yerde yatmaktadır. Sanki bir kavga olmuş ve biri diğerini yere devirmiş gibidir. Hayatta kalma mücadelesinde her insan diğer bütün insanların düşmanıdır ve asıl galibiyet olan hayatta kalmayla karşılaştırıldığında, çekilen bütün ıstırap önemsizdir. Hayatta kalan adam ister bir, ister çok sayıda ölüyle karşılaşmış olsun, durumun özü onun kendisini emsalsiz hissetmesidir. Kendisini orada tek başına dururken görür ve bununla övünür; bu anın ona verdiği iktidar-dan söz ederken, bu duygunun başka bir şeyden değil; yalnızca kendi tekil olma duygusundan türediğini asla unutmamalıyız.syf245
Bu denli korkunç bir boyuta ulaşan hayatta kalanla baş etmenin bir yolunun bulunup bulunmadığı bugün en önemli sorudur, hatta insan bunun tek önemli soru olduğunu söylemek zorunda hissediyor kendini. Çağdaş yaşamın parçalılığı ve hareketliliği, bu temel sorunun basitliğini görmemizi ve bu sorun üzerinde yoğunlaşmamızı engellemektedir. Çünkü insanın hayatta kalma-ya yönelik tutkulu arzusuna tek çözüm ölümsüzlüğü hak eden yaratıcı yalnızlıktır; bu da, doğası gereği yalnızca çok az insan için bir çözüm olabilir.syf509
Benim Canetti ile ilgili asıl hedefim tek romanı olan Körleşmeyi okumak, öncesinde tarzına diline alışmak adına deneme tarzında iki kitabını seçtim, bu ve İnsanın taşrası.
Bu kitapla ilgili benim beklentim biraz farklıydı aslında, 2. Dünya savaşı, Nazizim sırasında Avrupa'da yaşamış, o medeniyetin bir çocuğu olarak yazardan beklentim yakın tarihe dair, kitlesel göç-kaçış, savaşla ilgili daha fazla bilgi edinmekti. Bu noktada istediğimi bulamasamda kitle kavramı, psikolojisi, iktidar analizi çok derinlikli bir eser. Kitabı okurken beni en zorlayan, boğan kısımları, ilkel kabilelerin ölüm, doğum, av savaş, dans, dinsel törenleri, yerlilerle ilgili hikayeler, mitoloji, efsane kısımları oldu. Hoşuma giden yerler, tekrar tekrar okuduğumda çokça kısım oldu; Kitle niteliklerini veriyor Canetti, dört tane -büyümek ister, daima eşitlik ister, yoğunluğu vardır, bir yöne gereksinim duyar- ve bunları açıklarken çok ilginç metaforlar kullanıyor, okyanus, dalgalar, ormanlar, dans-ayakların ritmi, çarpıcı bir kitle örneği arena... En beğendiğim bölüm Hayatta kalan ve Emir oldu, hayatta kalma anı iktidar anıdır diyor Canetti, soru soran iktidarı uygular, soru sormak zora dayalı müdaheledir, insanın özgürlüğü verilen her yanıtta kısıtlanıyor...
Çok yönlü bir kitap, benim için çok kolay bir okuma olmadı, ilgilisine meraklısına tavsiye edilir. Herkese keyifli okumalar.
Giriş; İnsanı, bilinmeyenin dokunuşundan daha çok korkutan hiçbir şey yoktur.
Hayatta kalma anı iktidar anıdır. Ölümün görüntüsü karşısında düşülen dehşet ölen bir başkası olduğundan tatmine dönüşür. Hayatta kalan ayakta dururken ölen yerde yatmaktadır. Sanki bir kavga olmuş ve biri diğerini yere devirmiş gibidir. Hayatta kalma mücadelesinde her insan diğer bütün insanların düşmanıdır ve asıl galibiyet olan hayatta kalmayla karşılaştırıldığında, çekilen bütün ıstırap önemsizdir. Hayatta kalan adam ister bir, ister çok sayıda ölüyle karşılaşmış olsun, durumun özü onun kendisini emsalsiz hissetmesidir. Kendisini orada tek başına dururken görür ve bununla övünür; bu anın ona verdiği iktidar-dan söz ederken, bu duygunun başka bir şeyden değil; yalnızca kendi tekil olma duygusundan türediğini asla unutmamalıyız.syf245
Bu denli korkunç bir boyuta ulaşan hayatta kalanla baş etmenin bir yolunun bulunup bulunmadığı bugün en önemli sorudur, hatta insan bunun tek önemli soru olduğunu söylemek zorunda hissediyor kendini. Çağdaş yaşamın parçalılığı ve hareketliliği, bu temel sorunun basitliğini görmemizi ve bu sorun üzerinde yoğunlaşmamızı engellemektedir. Çünkü insanın hayatta kalma-ya yönelik tutkulu arzusuna tek çözüm ölümsüzlüğü hak eden yaratıcı yalnızlıktır; bu da, doğası gereği yalnızca çok az insan için bir çözüm olabilir.syf509
January 21, 2009
More literary than scientific, Canetti's anthropological investigation of crowd behavior will leave you looking both at human behavior and the natural world in new ways. Overstatements, stereotypes, all-too-tidy categories, and strained associations abound, yet the more one approaches the book as literature and less as a scientific treatise the more one can appreciate the insights throughout. An important book for better understanding oneself, religion, politics, sports fans, high school, and just about anything else.
September 29, 2024
Elias Canetti explores the multifaceted nature of crowds, revealing unexpected examples like the deceased, words and gestures. He introduces terms for different types of crowds: open, stagnant, rhythmic � a spectrum of human gatherings. Canetti proposes the "crowd crystal" as a catalyst for their formation and examines the power of symbols used by crowds, including national ones. Interestingly, he even suggests money itself as a crowd symbol, with inflation as a "crowd phenomenon."
Stepping beyond individuals, Canetti examines the psychological shift that occurs when people join a crowd. This transformation can be liberating, a shedding of personal responsibility and inhibitions. Anonymity grants the freedom to act in ways unthinkable alone, fueled by the contagious energy of the group. This isn't just a loss of individuality; it's a merging into a larger, primal collective consciousness.
Food becomes a fascinating lens for power. Canetti suggests the leader might be the one who can eat the most, a potential ruler in older societies. He connects power with survival, but with a twist: while individuals simply want to stay alive, leaders crave the ultimate prize � being the sole survivor, a position achieved through elimination. Canetti populates his argument with historical tyrants, both notorious and obscure. However, it remains ambiguous whether he believes all leaders, even democratic ones, share the same dark ambition.
Canetti explores power beyond simple control. It's also about the spread and exercise of influence within the crowd. Power becomes contagious, amplifying individual actions into collective force. This can lead to significant social change. However, fear plays a crucial role too. Canetti shows how leaders exploit fear to maintain power, offering security and safety as a counterpoint. This interplay of fear and reassurance is key to understanding how crowds are controlled and mobilized, a theme with echoes in both historical and contemporary contexts. Hundreds of events are described. From Xhosa suicidal sacrifices that decimated the people to Shiite Ashura self mutilation in religious extacy we are privy to the famous, the less known and the downright esoteric. "Crowds and Power" thus challenges us to look deeper at the motivations and mechanisms of collective action, urging us to grasp the undercurrents shaping our world.
Stepping beyond individuals, Canetti examines the psychological shift that occurs when people join a crowd. This transformation can be liberating, a shedding of personal responsibility and inhibitions. Anonymity grants the freedom to act in ways unthinkable alone, fueled by the contagious energy of the group. This isn't just a loss of individuality; it's a merging into a larger, primal collective consciousness.
Food becomes a fascinating lens for power. Canetti suggests the leader might be the one who can eat the most, a potential ruler in older societies. He connects power with survival, but with a twist: while individuals simply want to stay alive, leaders crave the ultimate prize � being the sole survivor, a position achieved through elimination. Canetti populates his argument with historical tyrants, both notorious and obscure. However, it remains ambiguous whether he believes all leaders, even democratic ones, share the same dark ambition.
Canetti explores power beyond simple control. It's also about the spread and exercise of influence within the crowd. Power becomes contagious, amplifying individual actions into collective force. This can lead to significant social change. However, fear plays a crucial role too. Canetti shows how leaders exploit fear to maintain power, offering security and safety as a counterpoint. This interplay of fear and reassurance is key to understanding how crowds are controlled and mobilized, a theme with echoes in both historical and contemporary contexts. Hundreds of events are described. From Xhosa suicidal sacrifices that decimated the people to Shiite Ashura self mutilation in religious extacy we are privy to the famous, the less known and the downright esoteric. "Crowds and Power" thus challenges us to look deeper at the motivations and mechanisms of collective action, urging us to grasp the undercurrents shaping our world.
June 6, 2010
This is a truly fascinating and perspective-altering examination of the phenomenon of crowds, and the power formations out of which various crowd configurations evolved, developed from a literary-mythological-psychological perspective. One of Canetti's principal explicatory methods is to describe custom and ritual amongst the modern remnant of hunting-gathering mankind - Australian aborigines and certain tribes of Southern Africa, for example - as well as using mystic religious ceremonial for illustrative purposes (a violent incident from an Islamic pilgrimage to Mecca providing an especially tense and powerful moment). Packed with startling and revelatory insights - including that crowds desire fulfillment of GEDD: Growth, Equality, Density, and Direction; the way primitive man viewed crowds of animals and transferred them into himself; a method of interpreting crowd behavior in such entities as bacilli and spermatozoids; the manner in which an individual accepts jostling and touching with congeries of others that overcomes his innate revulsion of physical contact with someone or something strange, tainted as the unknown is with stochastic death - nevertheless I have found my interest waning entering the final stretch of the book. It's as illuminating as hell, yet for all of that I cannot muster the enthusiasm to keep plugging, and I'm itching to move on to something else; thus, I'll shelve it in the old Working Through category and finish it off gradually, in bits and pieces.
June 8, 2018
Van Elias Canetti (Nobelprijs 1981) heb ik het nodige gelezen, en vooral "Het Martyrium" vond ik echt geweldig. Maar zijn essayistische hoofdwerk "Massa en Macht" las ik nu pas. Dat had eerder gemogen, want dit was echt een meesterwerk in de buitencategorie. Ik ben volkomen flabbergasted, euforisch en overdonderd. Ja, ik hou van lezen en bejubel veel boeken, maar dit boek is van zo'n zeldzame klasse dat ik mij eigenlijk totaal onmachtig voel om er ook maar iets over te zeggen.
Het is een geniaal en ongelofelijk origineel essay van ruim 600 bladzijden, in twaalf briljante essayistische hoofdstukken waarin elke paragraaf ook weer een parel is van essayistische eigenzinnige schrijfkunst. Canetti schrijft adembenemend over massa's en meutes, en over de vele verschillende vormen (inclusief de biologische oervormen), functies en verlokkingen daarvan. En nog adembenemender schrijft hij over talloos verschillende vormen van macht, en over de biologische oervormen van het bevel. Daarmee reageert hij uiteraard op de angstwekkende massa en macht- fenomenen die we leerden kennen in met name de Tweede Wereldoorlog, maar ook nog erna. En toch vallen de namen Hitler en Stalin maar heel sporadisch. Want Canetti's invalshoek is ongehoord origineel: de zo brandend actuele verschijnselen massa en macht exploreert hij niet door een grondige analyse van de moderne geschiedenis, maar door een even eigenzinnige als meeslepende exploratie van tientallen mythen uit alle windstreken, van tientallen antropologische teksten over natuurvolkeren of vergeten exotische vorsten, en dat dan gecombineerd met uiterst minutieuze en originele bespreking van teksten van en over schizofrenen, paralytici, lijders aan paranoia en meer. Waarmee hij zijn overtuiging demonstreert dat juist de pre-logische wereld der mythen ons veel te zeggen heeft, zeker over massa en macht. En dat juist de grotesk uitvergrote waanbeelden van geesteszieken ons veel kunnen leren over de pre-logische aspecten van onze waanzinnige wereld. Hij doet dat alles niet op de logisch-systematische wijze van de wetenschapper: zijn bronnengebruik getuigt weliswaar van een overdonderende eruditie, maar zijn interpretatie van die bronnen is steeds enorm persoonlijk, en zijn conclusies zijn in mijn beleving vaak niet met heel veel logische argumenten onderbouwd. Maar die conclusies zijn wel enorm pregnant geformuleerd, en wel enorm overtuigend als verhaal of als literair beeld. Volgens mij kun je niet volhouden dat Canetti in "Massa en Macht" de fenomenen "massa" en "macht" op wetenschappelijke wijze heeft geanalyseerd en ontleed. Maar hij geeft wel enorm pregnante invalshoeken op die beide fenomenen, die je nergens anders vindt. En hij maakt daarmee ervaringsintensiteiten voelbaar of zichtbaar die je in een conventionele wetenschappelijke of beschouwelijke tekst niet zult zien.
De eerste zinnen van het boek luiden bijvoorbeeld: "Voor niets is de mens meer beducht dan voor aanraking door iets onbekends. [...] Overal gaat de mens de aanraking door een vreemd element uit de weg. 's Nachts, of ook gewoon in het donker, kan de schrik om een onverwachte aanraking in paniek ontaarden. Zelfs de kleren waarborgen niet genoeg veiligheid; hoe gemakkelijk zijn ze niet te verscheuren, hoe gemakkelijk is het niet om tot het naakte, weerloze vlees van de aangevallene door te dringen. Alle afstanden die de mensen om zich heen geschapen hebben, zijn door deze aanrakingsvrees ingegeven. Men sluit zich in huizen op waarin niemand mag binnenkomen; slechts daarin voelt men zich ten dele veilig. De angst voor de inbreker geldt niet alleen zijn roofzuchtige bedoelingen, ze is ook een vrees voor zijn plotselinge, onverwachte greep uit het donker. De hand, tot klauw gevormd, wordt als symbool voor deze angst altijd weer gebruikt. Relevant is in dit opzicht de dubbele betekenis van het Duitse woord angreifen. Zowel de onschuldige aanraking als de gevaarlijke aanval ligt erin besloten, en iets van het laatste klinkt in het eerste altijd door". Geweldige zinnen, naar mijn smaak. Ze verklaren niets: nergens staat immers waarom de mens de aanraking door het onbekende vreest of zou moeten vrezen. Maar deze zinnen maken door de kracht van hun formulering wel de irrationele intensiteit van deze oerangst fraai voelbaar. Vind ik. Met soortgelijke, even essayistische als eigenzinnig-indringende zinnen, maakt Canetti snel daarna al even voelbaar dat het noodzakelijk is om je te verschansen achter muren om deze angstwekkende aanraking door het onbekende te voorkomen. Maar ook dat die muren vervolgens weer enorm beklemmend zijn, omdat ze leiden tot isolatie en onverbondenheid. En dat, suggereert Canetti met nog meer van die denderend suggestieve Canetti-zinnen, verklaart de verlokking van de massa: in de massa vormen mensen samen één lichaam, zijn alle isolerende barrières opgeheven, en is ook de panische aanrakingsvrees overwonnen. Ziedaar de verlokking van de massa. Die Canetti vervolgens met allerlei voorbeelden uit mythen en antropologische bronnen nog weer extra vorm en inhoud geeft, op meeslepende wijze.
Op vergelijkbare, maar naar mijn smaak nog meeslepender wijze geeft Canetti vorm en inhoud aan het begrip "macht". Het is voor mij uiteraard onmogelijk om alle facetten van Canetti's machtsbegrip hier toe te lichten, te meer omdat ik zijn boek nog wel een paar keer zal moeten lezen om alle rijkdom van dit begrip te doorgronden. Maar echt exceptioneel imponerend vond ik het hoofdstuk "De overlevende", waarin Canetti ons via diverse mythische, exotische en historische verhalen confronteert met een genadeloze hypothese: leiders willen overleven, en putten hun kracht uit de duizenden of zelfs miljoenen die sterven. Niet alleen vijanden, maar ook vrienden of mensen uit het eigen volk. En in latere hoofdstukken maakt hij helaas maar al te aannemelijk dat paranoia en grootheidswaanzin structurele componenten zijn van elk leiderschap. Van Hitler, maar ook van Dzjengis Khan, vele koningen of aanvoerders van exotische volkeren, en vele grote leiders in oude mythen. Maar ook, in meer gedomesticeerde vorm, van diverse veel beschaafde leiders nu. De minder beschaafde leiders hebben nu veel meer mogelijkheden om daadwerkelijk miljoenen te vermoorden en als enige te overleven. Of, in Canetti's hamerende woorden: "Dzjengis Khan! Timoer Lenk! Hitler! - aan onze mogelijkheden afgemeten erbarmelijke beginnelingen en sukkels!" De meer beschaafde leiders zullen weliswaar geen hele dodenakkers op hun geweten willen hebben, maar zullen ook de nodige destructie teweeg brengen, zij het in gedomesticeerde vorm. Want er is geen leiderschap denkbaar zonder bevel. En in elk bevel, ook zin zijn meest gedomesticeerde en milde vorm, is volgens Canetti nog de oervorm en biologische grond voelbaar waaruit het bevel ontstond: de schreeuw van het roofdier die hele massa's in paniek deed vluchten. Elk bevel is bovendien als een pijl, die een angel nalaat in degene die het bevel heeft moeten opvolgen: een "kristal van rancune" dat als een soort vreemd lichaam in het eigen innerlijk voortleeft en doorettert. Elk kind heeft meerdere bevelen moeten opvolgen, elke ondergeschikte heeft tientallen van zulke angels moeten oppotten in zijn lichaam. En er is maar één manier om verlichting te vinden: anderen bevelen zoals je zelf ooit bent bevolen, zodat je de eigen pijnlijke angels en kristallen van rancune in een ander overplant.
Dit is nog maar een flintertje van wat Canetti ons vertelt over macht en bevel, en ik kan geen recht doen aan zijn rijke en uit vele bronnen puttende essayistiek. Maar ik hoop dat ik althans iets over weet te brengen van zijn werkelijk genadeloze boodschap. Want hij is ten eerste knokenhard over de gevaren van machthebbers, die hij vermoedelijk ook vermoed in democratisch gekozen machthebbers. En hij is snijdend meedogenloos over de paranoïde of rancuneuze of schizofrene kantjes van iedereen die anderen beveelt, hoe beleefd soms ook. Maar bovendien laat hij in spaarzame korte bijzinnen duidelijk merken dat iedereen te maken heeft met macht, zowel door bevelen uit te oefenen als bevelen te ondergaan. Ik heb dus angels in mij door bevelen van anderen, anderen hebben angels in zich door bevelen van mij. Ik heb door bijvoorbeeld kritische vragen te stellen of in discussies net wat behendiger te zijn kristallen van rancune in anderen achter gelaten. Anderen hebben dat bij mij gedaan door soms net wat rapper of slimmer te zijn dan ik, en daarvoor stel ik mij dan schadeloos door later een keer rapper te zijn dan zij of door mij af te reageren op mijn vrouw of mijn vrienden. Ja, het is vreselijk maar het is waar: ook ik pot angels op, ook ik ontlast mij daarvan ten koste van anderen. Canetti is genadeloos over machthebbers, en radicaal ontnuchterend over hun soms volkomen destructieve en paranoïde overleversdrift. Maar hij is ook genadeloos over u en mij. En dat is misschien nog wel confronterender.
Behalve genadeloos is Canetti echter ook appellerend. Hij sluit "Massa en Macht" af met de woorden: "Wie de macht wil aanvatten, moet het bevel onder ogen zien en de middelen vinden om het van zijn angel te beroven". En daarvoor schreef hij: "Van welke kant men het ook bekijkt, het bevel in de compacte, afgeronde vorm die het na een lange geschiedenis tegenwoordig heeft, is het gevaarlijkste afzonderlijke element in de samenleving van de mensen geworden. Men moet de moed hebben zich ertegen te verzetten en zijn heerschappij aan het wankelen te brengen. Er moeten middelen en wegen worden gevonden om het grootste deel van de mens ervoor te vrijwaren. Men mag het niet toestaan meer dan de huid te schrammen. Zijn angels moeten tot pluisjes worden die men met een lichte beweging wegstrijkt". Opzwepende en inspirerende woorden, vind ik. Tegelijk echter wel zeer moeilijk op te volgen, want er is -zo suggereert ook Canetti- nauwelijks interactie mogelijk zonder elementen van macht en bevel. Bovendien werkt hij in "Massa en macht" niet expliciet uit wat die middelen en wegen zijn om zich voor het bevel te vrijwaren.
En toch bevat dit magnifieke boek volgens mij belangrijke en inspirerende suggesties om ons te wapenen tegen de macht van het bevel. Niet voor niets gaat het boek na de laatst geciteerde woorden verder met een nieuw hoofdstuk getiteld "De metamorfose" (die Verwandlung). In dat hoofdstuk (maar ook in eerdere en latere) liet Canetti al doorschemeren dat metamorfose en gedaanteverandering het tegendeel zijn van wat een machthebber beoogt. Immers, de machthebber wil eeuwig en onveranderlijk aan zichzelf gelijk zijn in een wereld die gefixeerd is omdat hij aan de machthebber gehoorzaamt, terwijl metamorfoses horen bij een fluïde wereld waarin alles voortdurend verandert. Bovendien, in o.a. de door Canetti prachtig geparafraseerde Bosjesmannen- mythes betekent metamorfose ook vergaande identificatie: de Bosjesman voelt het naderen van springbokken omdat hij als het ware het gras aan zijn voeten voelt dat de mijlen verderop rondlopende springbok aan zijn poten voelt, en dat betekent dat de Bosjesman zich zo sterk in springbokken verplaatst dat hij ZELF een springbok WORDT. Wat voor de Bosjesman geen fantasie is, maar realiteit: als het al "verbeeldingskracht' is, dan gaat het om verbeeldingskracht die ingrijpt in de fysieke werkelijkheid. Dat soort identificatie, waarbij het ik door totale inleving daadwerkelijk in de ander metamorfoseert, is de machthebber uiteraard een gruwel. En het is het tegendeel van het bevel waarin ik de ander tot iets dwing of iets opleg. In zijn latere, prachtige essay "Das Beruf des Dichters" (in de prachtbundel: "Das Gewissen der Worte") omschreef Canetti de dichter dan ook als hoeder van "Verwandlungen": juist dichters en schrijvers kunnen, volgens Canetti, door de kracht van hun verbeeldingskracht en inlevingsvermogen, erin slagen om de metamorfose op zijn minst te benaderen. Zij zijn niet, zoals de bevelende machthebber, star aan zichzelf gelijk, maar verplaatsen zich bijvoorbeeld in fictieve personages en WORDEN dan voor even die personages, of WORDEN voor even die jubelende vogel uit hun gedicht. Kortom, het hoofdstuk over de metamorfoses lijkt mij mede bedoeld als inspiratiebron voor een fluïde, veranderlijke vorm van denken die althans ten dele ontsnapt aan de starre wereld van het bevel.
Maar misschien geldt dat nog wel sterker voor de eigenzinnige en uiterst creatieve opzet van het boek als geheel. Want Canetti houdt zich in "Massa en Macht" aan geen enkele conventie, dus aan geen enkel bevel dat dicteert hoe een boek hoort te zijn. Waar een normale analyse van massa en macht vooral de contemporaine geschiedenis had geëxploreerd, daar put Canetti - op ook nog eens ongehoord creatieve en oorspronkelijke wijze- uit mythen, antropologische bronnen en analyses van geestesziekten. Waar een normaal non-fictie boek ons poogt te overtuigen met argumentatie en logica, daar betovert Canetti ons met ongehoord originele essayistiek en met de enorme kracht van zijn metaforische beelden. Door die kracht van zijn beelden is dit boek erg literair, terwijl het non-fictie is; door de enorme eruditie ervan (zie alleen al de ellenlange bronnenlijst aan het slot) is het erg wetenschappelijk en dus weer niet literair; door de keuze voor een essayistisch-literaire stijl en vorm in plaats van een analytisch-verklarende is het echter weer niet wetenschappelijk. Dit boek geeft ongehoord originele en inspirerende inzichten in de fenomenen massa en macht, en de inzichten in macht en bevel zijn naar mijn smaak zelfs snijdend en verontrustend. Ze ontmaskeren en ontwapenen daarmee ten dele de machthebber tegenover ons en in ons. Maar tegelijk laat dit boek ons honderden bladzijden verbijsterd genieten van een voortdurend volkomen originele en oorspronkelijke geest: de geest van iemand die alles op zijn eigen, hoogst singuliere wijze doordenkt en formuleert, zonder zich te storen aan welk bevel van welke conventie dan ook. Een geest die beweegt van Bosjesmannen naar Hunnen naar Indiaanse mythen naar Hitler naar de paranoïde Schreber naar Perzische koningen en terug. Een geest die bodemloze en onuitputtelijke eruditie paart aan vaak aforistische, soms groteske en bizar beeldende schrijfkunst. Wat dan een boek oplevert dat onuitputtelijk rijk is maar vooral onuitputtelijk verrassend en ongrijpbaar. En zo tot een monument wordt voor een wijze van denken die aan de rigiditeit van macht en bevel ontsnapt.
Mij vrijwaren voor het bevel van anderen gaat nooit helemaal lukken, en mijzelf afleren om macht uit te oefenen al helemaal niet. Ik ben en blijf kortom een rancuneuze lul die ook bij anderen rancuneuze angels zal blijven inplanten. Maar Canetti lezen is voor mij wel een manier om de scherpe kantjes daarvan wat minder scherp te maken. Of om dat op zijn minst te proberen. En het is bovendien intrigerend om als lezer jezelf onder te dompelen in het brein van een zo scherpzinnige, creatieve en oorspronkelijke denker en schrijver. Het is duidelijk, ik ga meteen meer lezen van hem!
Het is een geniaal en ongelofelijk origineel essay van ruim 600 bladzijden, in twaalf briljante essayistische hoofdstukken waarin elke paragraaf ook weer een parel is van essayistische eigenzinnige schrijfkunst. Canetti schrijft adembenemend over massa's en meutes, en over de vele verschillende vormen (inclusief de biologische oervormen), functies en verlokkingen daarvan. En nog adembenemender schrijft hij over talloos verschillende vormen van macht, en over de biologische oervormen van het bevel. Daarmee reageert hij uiteraard op de angstwekkende massa en macht- fenomenen die we leerden kennen in met name de Tweede Wereldoorlog, maar ook nog erna. En toch vallen de namen Hitler en Stalin maar heel sporadisch. Want Canetti's invalshoek is ongehoord origineel: de zo brandend actuele verschijnselen massa en macht exploreert hij niet door een grondige analyse van de moderne geschiedenis, maar door een even eigenzinnige als meeslepende exploratie van tientallen mythen uit alle windstreken, van tientallen antropologische teksten over natuurvolkeren of vergeten exotische vorsten, en dat dan gecombineerd met uiterst minutieuze en originele bespreking van teksten van en over schizofrenen, paralytici, lijders aan paranoia en meer. Waarmee hij zijn overtuiging demonstreert dat juist de pre-logische wereld der mythen ons veel te zeggen heeft, zeker over massa en macht. En dat juist de grotesk uitvergrote waanbeelden van geesteszieken ons veel kunnen leren over de pre-logische aspecten van onze waanzinnige wereld. Hij doet dat alles niet op de logisch-systematische wijze van de wetenschapper: zijn bronnengebruik getuigt weliswaar van een overdonderende eruditie, maar zijn interpretatie van die bronnen is steeds enorm persoonlijk, en zijn conclusies zijn in mijn beleving vaak niet met heel veel logische argumenten onderbouwd. Maar die conclusies zijn wel enorm pregnant geformuleerd, en wel enorm overtuigend als verhaal of als literair beeld. Volgens mij kun je niet volhouden dat Canetti in "Massa en Macht" de fenomenen "massa" en "macht" op wetenschappelijke wijze heeft geanalyseerd en ontleed. Maar hij geeft wel enorm pregnante invalshoeken op die beide fenomenen, die je nergens anders vindt. En hij maakt daarmee ervaringsintensiteiten voelbaar of zichtbaar die je in een conventionele wetenschappelijke of beschouwelijke tekst niet zult zien.
De eerste zinnen van het boek luiden bijvoorbeeld: "Voor niets is de mens meer beducht dan voor aanraking door iets onbekends. [...] Overal gaat de mens de aanraking door een vreemd element uit de weg. 's Nachts, of ook gewoon in het donker, kan de schrik om een onverwachte aanraking in paniek ontaarden. Zelfs de kleren waarborgen niet genoeg veiligheid; hoe gemakkelijk zijn ze niet te verscheuren, hoe gemakkelijk is het niet om tot het naakte, weerloze vlees van de aangevallene door te dringen. Alle afstanden die de mensen om zich heen geschapen hebben, zijn door deze aanrakingsvrees ingegeven. Men sluit zich in huizen op waarin niemand mag binnenkomen; slechts daarin voelt men zich ten dele veilig. De angst voor de inbreker geldt niet alleen zijn roofzuchtige bedoelingen, ze is ook een vrees voor zijn plotselinge, onverwachte greep uit het donker. De hand, tot klauw gevormd, wordt als symbool voor deze angst altijd weer gebruikt. Relevant is in dit opzicht de dubbele betekenis van het Duitse woord angreifen. Zowel de onschuldige aanraking als de gevaarlijke aanval ligt erin besloten, en iets van het laatste klinkt in het eerste altijd door". Geweldige zinnen, naar mijn smaak. Ze verklaren niets: nergens staat immers waarom de mens de aanraking door het onbekende vreest of zou moeten vrezen. Maar deze zinnen maken door de kracht van hun formulering wel de irrationele intensiteit van deze oerangst fraai voelbaar. Vind ik. Met soortgelijke, even essayistische als eigenzinnig-indringende zinnen, maakt Canetti snel daarna al even voelbaar dat het noodzakelijk is om je te verschansen achter muren om deze angstwekkende aanraking door het onbekende te voorkomen. Maar ook dat die muren vervolgens weer enorm beklemmend zijn, omdat ze leiden tot isolatie en onverbondenheid. En dat, suggereert Canetti met nog meer van die denderend suggestieve Canetti-zinnen, verklaart de verlokking van de massa: in de massa vormen mensen samen één lichaam, zijn alle isolerende barrières opgeheven, en is ook de panische aanrakingsvrees overwonnen. Ziedaar de verlokking van de massa. Die Canetti vervolgens met allerlei voorbeelden uit mythen en antropologische bronnen nog weer extra vorm en inhoud geeft, op meeslepende wijze.
Op vergelijkbare, maar naar mijn smaak nog meeslepender wijze geeft Canetti vorm en inhoud aan het begrip "macht". Het is voor mij uiteraard onmogelijk om alle facetten van Canetti's machtsbegrip hier toe te lichten, te meer omdat ik zijn boek nog wel een paar keer zal moeten lezen om alle rijkdom van dit begrip te doorgronden. Maar echt exceptioneel imponerend vond ik het hoofdstuk "De overlevende", waarin Canetti ons via diverse mythische, exotische en historische verhalen confronteert met een genadeloze hypothese: leiders willen overleven, en putten hun kracht uit de duizenden of zelfs miljoenen die sterven. Niet alleen vijanden, maar ook vrienden of mensen uit het eigen volk. En in latere hoofdstukken maakt hij helaas maar al te aannemelijk dat paranoia en grootheidswaanzin structurele componenten zijn van elk leiderschap. Van Hitler, maar ook van Dzjengis Khan, vele koningen of aanvoerders van exotische volkeren, en vele grote leiders in oude mythen. Maar ook, in meer gedomesticeerde vorm, van diverse veel beschaafde leiders nu. De minder beschaafde leiders hebben nu veel meer mogelijkheden om daadwerkelijk miljoenen te vermoorden en als enige te overleven. Of, in Canetti's hamerende woorden: "Dzjengis Khan! Timoer Lenk! Hitler! - aan onze mogelijkheden afgemeten erbarmelijke beginnelingen en sukkels!" De meer beschaafde leiders zullen weliswaar geen hele dodenakkers op hun geweten willen hebben, maar zullen ook de nodige destructie teweeg brengen, zij het in gedomesticeerde vorm. Want er is geen leiderschap denkbaar zonder bevel. En in elk bevel, ook zin zijn meest gedomesticeerde en milde vorm, is volgens Canetti nog de oervorm en biologische grond voelbaar waaruit het bevel ontstond: de schreeuw van het roofdier die hele massa's in paniek deed vluchten. Elk bevel is bovendien als een pijl, die een angel nalaat in degene die het bevel heeft moeten opvolgen: een "kristal van rancune" dat als een soort vreemd lichaam in het eigen innerlijk voortleeft en doorettert. Elk kind heeft meerdere bevelen moeten opvolgen, elke ondergeschikte heeft tientallen van zulke angels moeten oppotten in zijn lichaam. En er is maar één manier om verlichting te vinden: anderen bevelen zoals je zelf ooit bent bevolen, zodat je de eigen pijnlijke angels en kristallen van rancune in een ander overplant.
Dit is nog maar een flintertje van wat Canetti ons vertelt over macht en bevel, en ik kan geen recht doen aan zijn rijke en uit vele bronnen puttende essayistiek. Maar ik hoop dat ik althans iets over weet te brengen van zijn werkelijk genadeloze boodschap. Want hij is ten eerste knokenhard over de gevaren van machthebbers, die hij vermoedelijk ook vermoed in democratisch gekozen machthebbers. En hij is snijdend meedogenloos over de paranoïde of rancuneuze of schizofrene kantjes van iedereen die anderen beveelt, hoe beleefd soms ook. Maar bovendien laat hij in spaarzame korte bijzinnen duidelijk merken dat iedereen te maken heeft met macht, zowel door bevelen uit te oefenen als bevelen te ondergaan. Ik heb dus angels in mij door bevelen van anderen, anderen hebben angels in zich door bevelen van mij. Ik heb door bijvoorbeeld kritische vragen te stellen of in discussies net wat behendiger te zijn kristallen van rancune in anderen achter gelaten. Anderen hebben dat bij mij gedaan door soms net wat rapper of slimmer te zijn dan ik, en daarvoor stel ik mij dan schadeloos door later een keer rapper te zijn dan zij of door mij af te reageren op mijn vrouw of mijn vrienden. Ja, het is vreselijk maar het is waar: ook ik pot angels op, ook ik ontlast mij daarvan ten koste van anderen. Canetti is genadeloos over machthebbers, en radicaal ontnuchterend over hun soms volkomen destructieve en paranoïde overleversdrift. Maar hij is ook genadeloos over u en mij. En dat is misschien nog wel confronterender.
Behalve genadeloos is Canetti echter ook appellerend. Hij sluit "Massa en Macht" af met de woorden: "Wie de macht wil aanvatten, moet het bevel onder ogen zien en de middelen vinden om het van zijn angel te beroven". En daarvoor schreef hij: "Van welke kant men het ook bekijkt, het bevel in de compacte, afgeronde vorm die het na een lange geschiedenis tegenwoordig heeft, is het gevaarlijkste afzonderlijke element in de samenleving van de mensen geworden. Men moet de moed hebben zich ertegen te verzetten en zijn heerschappij aan het wankelen te brengen. Er moeten middelen en wegen worden gevonden om het grootste deel van de mens ervoor te vrijwaren. Men mag het niet toestaan meer dan de huid te schrammen. Zijn angels moeten tot pluisjes worden die men met een lichte beweging wegstrijkt". Opzwepende en inspirerende woorden, vind ik. Tegelijk echter wel zeer moeilijk op te volgen, want er is -zo suggereert ook Canetti- nauwelijks interactie mogelijk zonder elementen van macht en bevel. Bovendien werkt hij in "Massa en macht" niet expliciet uit wat die middelen en wegen zijn om zich voor het bevel te vrijwaren.
En toch bevat dit magnifieke boek volgens mij belangrijke en inspirerende suggesties om ons te wapenen tegen de macht van het bevel. Niet voor niets gaat het boek na de laatst geciteerde woorden verder met een nieuw hoofdstuk getiteld "De metamorfose" (die Verwandlung). In dat hoofdstuk (maar ook in eerdere en latere) liet Canetti al doorschemeren dat metamorfose en gedaanteverandering het tegendeel zijn van wat een machthebber beoogt. Immers, de machthebber wil eeuwig en onveranderlijk aan zichzelf gelijk zijn in een wereld die gefixeerd is omdat hij aan de machthebber gehoorzaamt, terwijl metamorfoses horen bij een fluïde wereld waarin alles voortdurend verandert. Bovendien, in o.a. de door Canetti prachtig geparafraseerde Bosjesmannen- mythes betekent metamorfose ook vergaande identificatie: de Bosjesman voelt het naderen van springbokken omdat hij als het ware het gras aan zijn voeten voelt dat de mijlen verderop rondlopende springbok aan zijn poten voelt, en dat betekent dat de Bosjesman zich zo sterk in springbokken verplaatst dat hij ZELF een springbok WORDT. Wat voor de Bosjesman geen fantasie is, maar realiteit: als het al "verbeeldingskracht' is, dan gaat het om verbeeldingskracht die ingrijpt in de fysieke werkelijkheid. Dat soort identificatie, waarbij het ik door totale inleving daadwerkelijk in de ander metamorfoseert, is de machthebber uiteraard een gruwel. En het is het tegendeel van het bevel waarin ik de ander tot iets dwing of iets opleg. In zijn latere, prachtige essay "Das Beruf des Dichters" (in de prachtbundel: "Das Gewissen der Worte") omschreef Canetti de dichter dan ook als hoeder van "Verwandlungen": juist dichters en schrijvers kunnen, volgens Canetti, door de kracht van hun verbeeldingskracht en inlevingsvermogen, erin slagen om de metamorfose op zijn minst te benaderen. Zij zijn niet, zoals de bevelende machthebber, star aan zichzelf gelijk, maar verplaatsen zich bijvoorbeeld in fictieve personages en WORDEN dan voor even die personages, of WORDEN voor even die jubelende vogel uit hun gedicht. Kortom, het hoofdstuk over de metamorfoses lijkt mij mede bedoeld als inspiratiebron voor een fluïde, veranderlijke vorm van denken die althans ten dele ontsnapt aan de starre wereld van het bevel.
Maar misschien geldt dat nog wel sterker voor de eigenzinnige en uiterst creatieve opzet van het boek als geheel. Want Canetti houdt zich in "Massa en Macht" aan geen enkele conventie, dus aan geen enkel bevel dat dicteert hoe een boek hoort te zijn. Waar een normale analyse van massa en macht vooral de contemporaine geschiedenis had geëxploreerd, daar put Canetti - op ook nog eens ongehoord creatieve en oorspronkelijke wijze- uit mythen, antropologische bronnen en analyses van geestesziekten. Waar een normaal non-fictie boek ons poogt te overtuigen met argumentatie en logica, daar betovert Canetti ons met ongehoord originele essayistiek en met de enorme kracht van zijn metaforische beelden. Door die kracht van zijn beelden is dit boek erg literair, terwijl het non-fictie is; door de enorme eruditie ervan (zie alleen al de ellenlange bronnenlijst aan het slot) is het erg wetenschappelijk en dus weer niet literair; door de keuze voor een essayistisch-literaire stijl en vorm in plaats van een analytisch-verklarende is het echter weer niet wetenschappelijk. Dit boek geeft ongehoord originele en inspirerende inzichten in de fenomenen massa en macht, en de inzichten in macht en bevel zijn naar mijn smaak zelfs snijdend en verontrustend. Ze ontmaskeren en ontwapenen daarmee ten dele de machthebber tegenover ons en in ons. Maar tegelijk laat dit boek ons honderden bladzijden verbijsterd genieten van een voortdurend volkomen originele en oorspronkelijke geest: de geest van iemand die alles op zijn eigen, hoogst singuliere wijze doordenkt en formuleert, zonder zich te storen aan welk bevel van welke conventie dan ook. Een geest die beweegt van Bosjesmannen naar Hunnen naar Indiaanse mythen naar Hitler naar de paranoïde Schreber naar Perzische koningen en terug. Een geest die bodemloze en onuitputtelijke eruditie paart aan vaak aforistische, soms groteske en bizar beeldende schrijfkunst. Wat dan een boek oplevert dat onuitputtelijk rijk is maar vooral onuitputtelijk verrassend en ongrijpbaar. En zo tot een monument wordt voor een wijze van denken die aan de rigiditeit van macht en bevel ontsnapt.
Mij vrijwaren voor het bevel van anderen gaat nooit helemaal lukken, en mijzelf afleren om macht uit te oefenen al helemaal niet. Ik ben en blijf kortom een rancuneuze lul die ook bij anderen rancuneuze angels zal blijven inplanten. Maar Canetti lezen is voor mij wel een manier om de scherpe kantjes daarvan wat minder scherp te maken. Of om dat op zijn minst te proberen. En het is bovendien intrigerend om als lezer jezelf onder te dompelen in het brein van een zo scherpzinnige, creatieve en oorspronkelijke denker en schrijver. Het is duidelijk, ik ga meteen meer lezen van hem!
October 1, 2019
�... In the crowd the individual feels that he is transcending the limits of his own person. He has a ser:se of relief, for the distances are removed which used to throw him back on himself and shut him in. With the lifting of these burdens of distance he feels free; his freedom is the crossing of these boundaries. He wants what is happening to him to happen to others too; and he expects it to happen to them. An earthen pot irritates him, for it is all boundaries. The closed doors of a house irritate him. Rites and ceremonies, any- thing which preserves distances, threaten him and seem unbearable. He fears that, sooner or later, an attempt will be made to force the disintegrating crowd back into these pre-existing vessels. To the crowd in its nakedness everything seems a Bastille�
“The dense coherence of the waves is something which men in a crowd know well. It entails a yielding to others as though they were oneself, as though there were no strict division between oneself and them.
Waves are not the only multiple element in the sea. There are also
the individual drops of water. It is true that they only become drops in isolation, when they are separated from each other. Their smallness and singleness then makes them seem powerless; they are almost nothing and arouse a feeling ofpity in the spectator. Put your hand into water, lift it out and watch the drops slipping singly and impotently down it. The pity you feel for them is as though they were human beings, hopelessly separated. They only begin to count again when
they can no longer be counted, when they have again become part of a whole.
The sea has a voice, which is very changeable and almost always audible. It is a voice which sounds like a thousand voices, and much has been attributed to it: patience, pain, and anger. But what is most impressive about it is its persistence. �
“The dense coherence of the waves is something which men in a crowd know well. It entails a yielding to others as though they were oneself, as though there were no strict division between oneself and them.
Waves are not the only multiple element in the sea. There are also
the individual drops of water. It is true that they only become drops in isolation, when they are separated from each other. Their smallness and singleness then makes them seem powerless; they are almost nothing and arouse a feeling ofpity in the spectator. Put your hand into water, lift it out and watch the drops slipping singly and impotently down it. The pity you feel for them is as though they were human beings, hopelessly separated. They only begin to count again when
they can no longer be counted, when they have again become part of a whole.
The sea has a voice, which is very changeable and almost always audible. It is a voice which sounds like a thousand voices, and much has been attributed to it: patience, pain, and anger. But what is most impressive about it is its persistence. �
March 12, 2017
probably too rooted in a post wwII world view to have more theoretical staying power than something less contemporaneously minded, Canetti's ultimate point - all of his wonderful cited primary source digressions aside (the real highlights of the book, imo) - is that we all need to learn how to think and act for ourselves. crowd behavior as rooted in ressentiment, political power as rooted in paranoia. misanthropic and entertaining. too anecdotal to be non-fiction. too documented to be fiction. nietzschean, ultimately.
August 26, 2024
Che fatica, mio caro Canetti! Questo saggio è sicuramente un lavoro molto ambizioso e complesso, che offre un'analisi approfondita e interdisciplinare dei fenomeni sociali e psicologici legati alle masse e al potere. Canetti esplora questi temi attraverso una vasta gamma di esempi storici, culturali e antropologici, attingendo a discipline come la sociologia, l'antropologia, la psicologia e la storia per fornire una visione articolata delle dinamiche di massa e del rapporto tra le masse e il potere. Detto questo però, che terribile fatica arrivare fino alla fine!
L'opera inizia definendo e classificando le masse, osservando come queste siano caratterizzate dalla tendenza a crescere, dall'uguaglianza tra i membri e dalla presenza di un obiettivo comune che le unisce. La massa offre un'esperienza di fusione collettiva in cui l'individuo perde la propria identità , trovando sollievo dall'isolamento e dalla paura della morte. Questa esperienza crea una sensazione di potenza collettiva e una temporanea euforia. Il potere, secondo Canetti, si nutre della paura e si manifesta attraverso il controllo e l'intimidazione, e chi detiene il potere cerca di mantenerlo ritardando la propria morte simbolica e dominando gli altri, trasformandoli in "morti simbolici". Ho trovato particolarmente interessante la parte in cui l'autore discute i simboli e i rituali del potere, che variano da cultura a cultura, ma servono tutti a legittimare e perpetuare l'autorità , creando una distanza tra chi comanda e chi è comandato. La massa, nella visione di Canetti, è ambivalente: può essere sia distruttiva che creativa. Se incontrollata, può portare a violenza e caos, ma allo stesso tempo ha anche il potenziale di rovesciare vecchi ordini e generare nuove forme di organizzazione e potere. Una delle intuizioni centrali di Canetti è che il potere teme la massa: i detentori del potere cercano di controllare o reprimere le masse per evitare che queste, con la loro forza rivoluzionaria, possano rovesciare il loro dominio. Tuttavia, il potere ha anche bisogno della massa per legittimarsi e manifestare la propria forza, creando una tensione continua tra controllo e paura della ribellione.
E' un saggio veramente molto denso, pieno di (fin troppi) riferimenti storici, mitologici e antropologici, che non si legge con grande facilità . Il libro infatti non segue una struttura lineare, ma si sviluppa attraverso innumerevoli riflessioni che esplorano il tema da diverse angolazioni, con un approccio a tratti troppo tecnico. E' sicuramente un'opera interessante per i temi trattati, ma l'ho trovato per la maggior parte troppo lento e pesante, ed è solo per l'esperienza di lettore che mi limito a dare una valutazione di due stelle.
L'opera inizia definendo e classificando le masse, osservando come queste siano caratterizzate dalla tendenza a crescere, dall'uguaglianza tra i membri e dalla presenza di un obiettivo comune che le unisce. La massa offre un'esperienza di fusione collettiva in cui l'individuo perde la propria identità , trovando sollievo dall'isolamento e dalla paura della morte. Questa esperienza crea una sensazione di potenza collettiva e una temporanea euforia. Il potere, secondo Canetti, si nutre della paura e si manifesta attraverso il controllo e l'intimidazione, e chi detiene il potere cerca di mantenerlo ritardando la propria morte simbolica e dominando gli altri, trasformandoli in "morti simbolici". Ho trovato particolarmente interessante la parte in cui l'autore discute i simboli e i rituali del potere, che variano da cultura a cultura, ma servono tutti a legittimare e perpetuare l'autorità , creando una distanza tra chi comanda e chi è comandato. La massa, nella visione di Canetti, è ambivalente: può essere sia distruttiva che creativa. Se incontrollata, può portare a violenza e caos, ma allo stesso tempo ha anche il potenziale di rovesciare vecchi ordini e generare nuove forme di organizzazione e potere. Una delle intuizioni centrali di Canetti è che il potere teme la massa: i detentori del potere cercano di controllare o reprimere le masse per evitare che queste, con la loro forza rivoluzionaria, possano rovesciare il loro dominio. Tuttavia, il potere ha anche bisogno della massa per legittimarsi e manifestare la propria forza, creando una tensione continua tra controllo e paura della ribellione.
E' un saggio veramente molto denso, pieno di (fin troppi) riferimenti storici, mitologici e antropologici, che non si legge con grande facilità . Il libro infatti non segue una struttura lineare, ma si sviluppa attraverso innumerevoli riflessioni che esplorano il tema da diverse angolazioni, con un approccio a tratti troppo tecnico. E' sicuramente un'opera interessante per i temi trattati, ma l'ho trovato per la maggior parte troppo lento e pesante, ed è solo per l'esperienza di lettore che mi limito a dare una valutazione di due stelle.
December 31, 2013
The best insights can sometimes come from meandering pathways. Elias Canetti (a Nobelate in 1981) seems to embody an interdisciplinary fervor in order to uncover patterns related to power and corruption. Armed with a lifetime of reading in anthropology, psychology, political science and rhetoric--and equipped with a life traversing totalitarian governments, two world wars and knowledge of numerous languages--he weaves together stories of ancient and all-but forgotten cultures (to me, at least) in order to draw implications for modern times.
Though confusing at times--though his conclusions often require tremendous leaps of faith--and in spite of the hordes of implicit arguments the reader must tweeze from the haystack, the book is quite profound.
It feels epic because of the multitudinous stories. It feels cumbersome because of the vast logic he employs to outline his theories. He uses many neologisms--constructing, as he goes, a new language with which to view discourses on power.
He is profound. And in my attempts to regard his legacy in contemporary studies, I am surprised to see a near-total absence. Perhaps, to do justice to this erudite (although perhaps eccentrically so) scholar, we should all take him up again.
He says, boldly: "Power has never lacked eulogists, and historians, who are professionally obsessed with it, can explain anything, either by the times (disguising their adulation as scholarship), or by necessity , which in their hands, can assume any and every shape." When we leave the study of anything to a particular -ian or -ist, we may not be gaining the whole story. And with a subject as incisive and important as power, we must all become intellectual savants...perhaps in the style of Elias Canetti.
Though confusing at times--though his conclusions often require tremendous leaps of faith--and in spite of the hordes of implicit arguments the reader must tweeze from the haystack, the book is quite profound.
It feels epic because of the multitudinous stories. It feels cumbersome because of the vast logic he employs to outline his theories. He uses many neologisms--constructing, as he goes, a new language with which to view discourses on power.
He is profound. And in my attempts to regard his legacy in contemporary studies, I am surprised to see a near-total absence. Perhaps, to do justice to this erudite (although perhaps eccentrically so) scholar, we should all take him up again.
He says, boldly: "Power has never lacked eulogists, and historians, who are professionally obsessed with it, can explain anything, either by the times (disguising their adulation as scholarship), or by necessity , which in their hands, can assume any and every shape." When we leave the study of anything to a particular -ian or -ist, we may not be gaining the whole story. And with a subject as incisive and important as power, we must all become intellectual savants...perhaps in the style of Elias Canetti.
September 10, 2016
All I hear is praise for this book. It's good but I feel not as good as it should have been. Its rambling, discursive style is somewhat disorienting. There is no introduction and the structure of the book is very loosely held together. There is no logical progression, just a meandering through ideas loosely related to the themes of crowds and power. The book is admirable for its erudition and scope, ranging through history, anthropology, mythology, psychology, politics, biology, and more to give us insight into the human condition. I particularly enjoyed Canetti's discussion of symbols of the crowd, the psychology of teeth and digestion, the hero, and fame. It's certainly worth reading, I only wish Canetti had provided an introduction to give us a clearer sense of what he specifically intended to achieve and why he chose to include and exclude what he did.
February 8, 2009
I read and re-read this book from front to back numerous times. The second half of this book is powerfully insightful. If one approaches this work from the perspective of deeply involved humanness, as literature, rather than austere science with cut and dried methodology, one may come away with a deeper, more comprehensive, and much more circumspect feeling and understanding for the human animal. The insights in this book are raw, to the point, and so far, are the most accurate and imaginative descriptions of the deepest and most embedded motives and behaviors of humankind.
July 10, 2019
Oldukça geniş bir konu ve bazı yerlerde [joseph campbell gibi], okuyucunun ön bilgisi olduğunu varsayarak hızlı hızlı isimler falan anlatıyor. Yine de okuması biraz ağır sürse de fena değil. Mezarlıklarla ilgili kısım falan oldukça ilginçti. Fiction kitabı olmadığı kesin ama kitapta savunulan tez bazen insanı (yazar tarafından) nasıl bir propagandaya maruz bırakıldığı ile ilgili kuşkulandırıyor. Yine de, argümanlar oldukça güçlü. Özellikle klasik müzik konserleri ile ilgili yorumları insanı gülümsetiyor.
August 15, 2020
One of those books EVERYONE should read.
August 20, 2022
(I included this book in my video of 5 Mind Blowing Books: )
One book that’s found a whole new level of relevance in the age of social media is Crowds and Power by Elias Canetti. Or at least, it seems relevant to me, though I haven’t actually heard it talked about in a long time.
With Crowds and Power, Canetti basically tries to explain the dynamics that make large groups of people follow particular trends of behaviour. Everything from general politics to violent mob uprisings are explored, but the book doesn’t do so in any kind of academic manner. Rather, Canetti creates this kind of universal writing style by utilising some of the oldest metaphors we can all identify with. For example, at the beginning of the book he describes how in ancient times, a fire would have attracted groups of people because it kept them warm. As things progressed the fire became something they could cook over, dance around, hold religious ceremonies at and of course, attract more people to or banish people from. As the book goes on the metaphors get more and more layered so you can gain insight into some modern social issues through a very primal mode of thought.
The book was written in the 1960s and supposedly gained much of its reputation by explaining what was at work behind the civil unrest in Eastern Europe at the time. I don’t know much about all that, but ninety per cent of everything I read in the book didn’t seem limited to a specific era. Because it’s written in such a detached, poetic manner, you kind of feel like it’s a guidebook that could be handed to an alien species to help them understand why the heck we do the things we’re doing. What makes it so mind-blowing is that you kind of start feeling like one of these alien observers when you finish reading it. Whether you’re standing in line for a political rally or diving into a mosh pit at a concert, you really start to feel the invisible forces that have everybody moving a certain way. On a cynical level, I’d say it’s a must-read for any marketing executives, entrepreneurs, or political candidates. But there’s some really fascinating stuff about human nature in it that you’d probably miss out on if you limited the book to such a utilitarian point of view.
(Check out the full video for more mind-blowing books: )
One book that’s found a whole new level of relevance in the age of social media is Crowds and Power by Elias Canetti. Or at least, it seems relevant to me, though I haven’t actually heard it talked about in a long time.
With Crowds and Power, Canetti basically tries to explain the dynamics that make large groups of people follow particular trends of behaviour. Everything from general politics to violent mob uprisings are explored, but the book doesn’t do so in any kind of academic manner. Rather, Canetti creates this kind of universal writing style by utilising some of the oldest metaphors we can all identify with. For example, at the beginning of the book he describes how in ancient times, a fire would have attracted groups of people because it kept them warm. As things progressed the fire became something they could cook over, dance around, hold religious ceremonies at and of course, attract more people to or banish people from. As the book goes on the metaphors get more and more layered so you can gain insight into some modern social issues through a very primal mode of thought.
The book was written in the 1960s and supposedly gained much of its reputation by explaining what was at work behind the civil unrest in Eastern Europe at the time. I don’t know much about all that, but ninety per cent of everything I read in the book didn’t seem limited to a specific era. Because it’s written in such a detached, poetic manner, you kind of feel like it’s a guidebook that could be handed to an alien species to help them understand why the heck we do the things we’re doing. What makes it so mind-blowing is that you kind of start feeling like one of these alien observers when you finish reading it. Whether you’re standing in line for a political rally or diving into a mosh pit at a concert, you really start to feel the invisible forces that have everybody moving a certain way. On a cynical level, I’d say it’s a must-read for any marketing executives, entrepreneurs, or political candidates. But there’s some really fascinating stuff about human nature in it that you’d probably miss out on if you limited the book to such a utilitarian point of view.
(Check out the full video for more mind-blowing books: )
June 22, 2021
Masa y poder tiene virtudes literarias en mucho mayor medida que cientÃficas. El análisis y estudio de la masa y su vÃnculo con el poder se hace más desde el lado de la imaginación y la elocuencia que desde el rigor cientÃfico. Cuenta, si acaso, con la virtud de aunar dentro de sà una ardua documentación que mediante la cita y transcripción del trabajo de, estos sÃ, expertos cientÃficos, le permite al autor vertebrar y aportar enjundia, contenido y solidez a algunas de sus teorÃas sobre la masa y su posterior análisis.
La obra es en sà irregular y alterna partes interesantes con otras que parecen explicaciones ad hoc hechas únicamente por la necesidad de ajustarlas de alguna manera a las teorÃas del autor, careciendo, por tanto, de razonabilidad y de peso en el conjunto de la obra. La lástima es que la originalidad y las aportaciones propias de Canetti no siempre coinciden. Lo original es aportado por los antropólogos y otros cientÃficos que el autor tiene la virtud de haber sabido reunir. Las aportaciones del autor son en ocasiones banales. Es por esto que pienso que el autor destaca mucho más como amanuense que como teórico y cientÃfico.
La obra, en mi humilde opinión, no tiene la agudeza, ni la brillantez, ni la originalidad o sabidurÃa que sà se desprende de, por ejemplo, La rebelión de las masas, de Ortega y Gasset.
Personalmente, Canetti me parece un autor muy sobrevalorado. Me resulta muy complicado entender su peso y posición en el siglo XX que como escritor la crÃtica intelectual le ha concedido. Su novela Auto de fe es directamente floja, una parodia hiperbólica de brocha gorda de los males del siglo XX que coquetea con el ridÃculo en demasiadas ocasiones.
La obra es en sà irregular y alterna partes interesantes con otras que parecen explicaciones ad hoc hechas únicamente por la necesidad de ajustarlas de alguna manera a las teorÃas del autor, careciendo, por tanto, de razonabilidad y de peso en el conjunto de la obra. La lástima es que la originalidad y las aportaciones propias de Canetti no siempre coinciden. Lo original es aportado por los antropólogos y otros cientÃficos que el autor tiene la virtud de haber sabido reunir. Las aportaciones del autor son en ocasiones banales. Es por esto que pienso que el autor destaca mucho más como amanuense que como teórico y cientÃfico.
La obra, en mi humilde opinión, no tiene la agudeza, ni la brillantez, ni la originalidad o sabidurÃa que sà se desprende de, por ejemplo, La rebelión de las masas, de Ortega y Gasset.
Personalmente, Canetti me parece un autor muy sobrevalorado. Me resulta muy complicado entender su peso y posición en el siglo XX que como escritor la crÃtica intelectual le ha concedido. Su novela Auto de fe es directamente floja, una parodia hiperbólica de brocha gorda de los males del siglo XX que coquetea con el ridÃculo en demasiadas ocasiones.
November 8, 2023
Elias Canetti aveva ventidue anni quando fece la sua prima esperienza di massa. Era il 15 luglio 1927, il quotidiano austriaco Reichspost riportava come «una giusta sentenza» la notizia dell’assoluzione dei poliziotti che avevano ucciso alcuni operai in una sparatoria nel Burgenland. I viennesi si riunirono spontaneamente in massa e appiccarono il fuoco al Palazzo di Giustizia.
Canetti era fra loro, come trascinato dall’immenso potere centripeto della folla costituitasi in massa.
Quel giorno il giovane Elias decise di dedicare la sua vita alla composizione di una monumentale opera sulla massa. Che avrebbe visto la luce solo nel 1960, dopo anni in cui l’autore si era imposto di non dedicarsi ad alcuna opera di carattere letterario per non lasciarsi sviare dal suo imponente lavoro.
In libreria trovate questo saggio spesso e volentieri negli scaffali di filosofia. Definizione un po� riduttiva, perché racchiude in sé i più svariati campi del sapere: filosofia sì, ma anche antropologia (molto), sociologia (e in verità io la direi più opera sociologica che filosofica), storia, psicanalisi.
È un saggio ponderoso, ma non difficile da leggere. In realtà fa più soggezione che altro. Bisogna superare lo scoglio delle prime pagine, ma poi si rivela molto più scorrevole di quanto siano normalmente le opere di così vasta portata.
Su:
Canetti era fra loro, come trascinato dall’immenso potere centripeto della folla costituitasi in massa.
Quel giorno il giovane Elias decise di dedicare la sua vita alla composizione di una monumentale opera sulla massa. Che avrebbe visto la luce solo nel 1960, dopo anni in cui l’autore si era imposto di non dedicarsi ad alcuna opera di carattere letterario per non lasciarsi sviare dal suo imponente lavoro.
In libreria trovate questo saggio spesso e volentieri negli scaffali di filosofia. Definizione un po� riduttiva, perché racchiude in sé i più svariati campi del sapere: filosofia sì, ma anche antropologia (molto), sociologia (e in verità io la direi più opera sociologica che filosofica), storia, psicanalisi.
È un saggio ponderoso, ma non difficile da leggere. In realtà fa più soggezione che altro. Bisogna superare lo scoglio delle prime pagine, ma poi si rivela molto più scorrevole di quanto siano normalmente le opere di così vasta portata.
Su:
Read
July 14, 2013I'll start by saying that I liked reading Crowds and Power, was deeply impressed by the concepts that Canetti develops and invokes, and entertained by the stories and myths he uses to buttress those concepts.
But this isn't scientific analysis at all-- it's literature above all else, and should be read in that light. Keep in mind that Canetti was writing in the structuralist heyday of the late '50s and early '60s-- this was a time when Marshall McLuhan was doing his thing with media, and when the name of Freud still held a mighty sway over psychology. You could make sweeping statements like these without that much evidence and get away with it.
But this isn't scientific analysis at all-- it's literature above all else, and should be read in that light. Keep in mind that Canetti was writing in the structuralist heyday of the late '50s and early '60s-- this was a time when Marshall McLuhan was doing his thing with media, and when the name of Freud still held a mighty sway over psychology. You could make sweeping statements like these without that much evidence and get away with it.
April 20, 2014
I thought this was amazing. Crazy crazy book that covers such an amazing range of the topics. All are essentially based about d the tic of crowds of humans mainly and the power associated with them. Highly recommended. Elias brings in a whole range of topics such as panic, rhythm, crowds of people and their types, the dead, hunting packs, native Indians, religious wars, Islam, Christianity, Judaism, Muharram, European nationalities, the destruction of the Xhosas, monkeys, epidemics, questions, commands, Mongols, African culture and the sultan of Delhi. :)
November 19, 2019
Kitle, iktidar ve otoriteye dair çok kitap okumamış olsam da Canetti'nin üslubu çok akıcıydı. Çevirmenin de hakkını yememek lazım tabii. Akıcı, rahat bir eser. İktidara dair "çok" derin bir şey bekliyorsanız sizi tatmin etmeyebilir. Fakat genel anlamda verimli bir okuma oldu.
Rahat bir eser olma kısmına yeniden değinmek isterim. Ne yazık rahatsızlık vermeyen eserler bize pek de bir şey katmamıştır. İyi eser bizi rahatsız eden ve bizde bir oyuk açan eserdir.
Bu kitabı çok beğensem de benden bir şeyler söküp almadı, beni rahatsız etmedi ve bene (bana değil) dokunmadı.
Rahat bir eser olma kısmına yeniden değinmek isterim. Ne yazık rahatsızlık vermeyen eserler bize pek de bir şey katmamıştır. İyi eser bizi rahatsız eden ve bizde bir oyuk açan eserdir.
Bu kitabı çok beğensem de benden bir şeyler söküp almadı, beni rahatsız etmedi ve bene (bana değil) dokunmadı.
April 22, 2022
Me esperaba mucho más. Siento juzgar asà la obra de todo un Nobel, pero decir otra cosa serÃa faltar a la verdad.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 173 reviews
Can't find what you're looking for?
Get help and learn more about the design.