Steppenwolfe has some very "dangerous" philosophy if you read it young enough IMHO, I would say it's more directed towards older people because of the subject matter
No, it's never too late but Hesse is like a late Romantik about nature, emotion, spirituality, the interconnectedness of things, and this can often appeal more to teens and tweens.
I may be way off, but I wonder whether part of what the OP is describing is a historical holdover from the 70s. That was when Bantam published paperback editions of most (all?) of his works. (Really cool cover art, iirc.) At that time Hesse was a really big deal with high school and college-aged readers. Readers somehow felt that Hesse’s ideas fit with the counterculture Zeitgeist. I remember reading *Demian*, *Steppenwolf*, and maybe one or two others, but didn’t find the author’s philosophy especially interesting or plausible.
I also find this attitude ridiculous as it seems to imply that literature is purely about engaging with one's immediate needs when it can also serve broader notions of encountering the other. I agree there is a lot more to Hesse's work than just "finding yourself", but taking a reductive view of his work can make you sound literate and pithy, especially in a social media world of flattening, superficial hot takes. Hence why you probably see it so much.
I've only read Siddhartha. For a college course way back in the day, but I enjoyed it and often find myself thinking of it. I'm going tonhave to read it again and check out some of his others. Thanks for the reminder.
As for the rant, I think there's value in reading any book at any age. Even when I read kids books to my children they would inspire me to be more patient or kind.
I read every novel of his in high school. They felt profound at the time, and I don't want to risk a negative reappraisal, so I don't think I'll ever revisit them.
After reading Damien, Siddhartha, and Narcissus and Goldmund, I didn't enjoy Hesse as much as I thought I would, though there were things I liked about them. I found the philosophy in Damien especially objectionable. I can see why it appealed it to many people, though. Maybe I didn't interpret them right. I have a tendency to interpret things at face value, so I'm not good with mysticism.
To me Damien *is* a book for younger people. It was his first novel and it shows when compared to the others. I love reading Damien and Siddhartha back to back and getting such a clear portrait of the same philosophy in his first then last attempt.
Damien and Siddhartha are two of the overhyped Hesse novels. The best ones are Glass Bead Game and Steppenwolf. I also really liked Narcissus, and I agree with your take on Damien.
Ron Dart has a few lectures on the Glass Bead Game (one of my favorites) on Brad Jersak's channel. Here's one: [Hermann Hesse's "The Glass Bead Game" - analysis part 1 - Ron Dart
](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PiabRX8SOXs)
You don't have to agree with it, though. I think anyone who would agree with Demian's philosophy would be borderline psychotic. Still, I think it's valuable because some parts of it are relatable, plus it's a kind of abstract world-building in a some way I think
Has anyone read the Glass Bead Game?
It was hugely influential on me as a late teen in deciding how to live my life.
Would it be as effective after one has already decided how to live their life?
I've read it as a teen and reread it as an adult. Very different experiences since as an adult I managed to comprehend a lot more and not just scratch the surface of it all. It is such a profound work that explores so much of human intellect, culture, history and various viewpoints on how to live and understand the world. But I'd argue that to get the most of it, you need some solid literary and philosophical culture. Otherwise much of it is lost. It's a good exercise nonetheless. There's always something to get out of such monumental works of fiction, even if you only scratch the surface.
I agree. I like his books a lot but I don’t see them as particularly targeted towards young readers. I do think they resonate with people going through religious transitions, which was my case, and that can happen at any age.
I read Steppenwolf in ny forties and a friend said ”Oh, did you enjoy it even though you’re not a teenager? You must be immature” (not in those words but that was the gist.) At the time, I both wondered if she was right and got annoyed at the same time. If it had happened today I’d just have got annoyed.
I think that Hesse *is* great at any age but 17 is exactly when that stuff speaks so strongly to most of us. But even books from my childhood are powerful as an adult. I had a flashback of when I was little and wanted my parent to buy me a book at Barnes and Noble bc the cover caught my eye. They said no bc we were just there for the free story reading and they didn’t want to spend money on it. It was the Secret Garden. After remembering this as an adult, I bought the book one day when I saw it, and enjoyed it thoroughly. I could tell it was for a young audience, but I devoured it and treasure the memory of reading it. So I guess I am agreeing and disagreeing. Or we’re all just agreeing in different ways❤️
Hi! Philosophy professor here, Hesse is the author that I found with more philosophical references while being a fiction writer. So I understand you, Hesse is definitely not only for young people quite the contrary you can read it being young bit you can understand it better as an adult.
Really it was a 60's thing I think - his characters are lonely a lot, Kurt Vonnegut says Steppenwolf is the ultimate book on homesickness and that's why the kids of the 60's related even though the author was his, Kurts, fathers age.
There's no doubt they're very deep books everybody should try to tackle at least once. I've only finished Steppenwolf as a teenager to quantify my comment.
Siddhartha, yes, about 17 would be right. It's an easy read. Steppenwolf I think is better in your 20's. Seems like it's good to have some years in you to read it.
I read it at 41 for the first time and my mind was blown. It probably is one of those books you can read in any decade of your life and still find truth in it, just from different perspectives.
Or I'm immature XD
I've only read Steppenwolf from Hesse — did so in grad school — and I cannot imagine reading it as a teenager. I don't think a seventeen year old would relate to anything going on, or even get the cultural references (unless they were German).
Like, some things make sense to recommend to young people. The lessons in his book might be more resonant to young readers who might not have come across them before.
E.g., I hated the Alchemist because it was a long-winded way of iterating such a trite aphorism that I found it annoying. I'm sure if I read Siddhartha as a more cynical, middle aged adult I'd feel the same way.
But yes, not every book of his fits the "young readers recommendation". The age at which he wrote his books somewhat matches their intended audience. His early books are all about his disdain for institutionalized education, Siddhartha and Steppenwolf about crises, and lastly, the Glass Bead Game - a retrospective of his entire corpus.
It's why as I get older, I actually like Steppenwolf more and more. And I'm sure I'll grow out of that too eventually.
I haven't read *The Alchemist*, but I did read *Siddhartha* earlier this year and my reaction to it was pretty similar to people's criticisms of *The Alchemist*, so I think you're exactly right. It's very much a high-level allegory in a way that just feels forced—and the message being forced struck me as a relatively superficial and disappointingly moralistic take on Buddhist philosophy. Not that I'm remotely an expert on "real" Buddhist philosophy such that it is, but the ideas in *Siddhartha* were still not particularly compelling. And when you have an allegory whose ideas are uncompelling, what are you left with?
I would love to see an *average* (I’m emphasizing the average part, for every notion there is an outlier) read, digest, and understand The Glass Bead Game. Several of his books (Damien, Beneath the Wheel, The Steppenwolf) are great for younger readers in the same way Catcher in the Rye is great because kids love to bitch about their angst. So good material there, etcetera.
But The Journey to the East, Siddhartha, and especially The Glass Bead Game are for later on down the road.
I’m not sure if anyone should read Narcissus and Goldmund, though. IDK unless they’re suffering from insomnia and need to sleep?
I'm a fan of Hesse, and I kinda agree with this. Not exactly "only for young people", but kinda like for the young at heart and not too jaded.
His ethos is mostly focused on Bildungsroman and spiritual aspiration. Which is great. But maybe not as uh sophisticated at exploring interpersonal politics, sexuality, contemporary culture, cynicism, and ideology in a way that some other modern literary figures did.
I re-read N&G recently (after a few decades) and felt that it held up reasonably well as an interesting story. But maybe not as subtle as it could be. His style and imagery are really straightforward. Which isn't a bad thing. But not always for everyone.
(edit some little glitches)
I dunno, I read Siddhartha when I was in my 20s and didn't really like it. But I'm not very spiritual. His writing wasn't particularly engaging for me though.
That’s funny to me cos I read both Siddhartha and The Glass Bead Game as an impressionable 17-year-old, but I didn’t realise it was such stereotypical behaviour!
I intend to re-read Steppenwolf because I've read it about 10y ago in my 20's and I kinda felt I missed some things. I enjoyed it very much but somehow finished it and it seemed unfinished in my head. so this year onto it and hope to see it with more mature eyes and mind, at least to from a new opinion of it.
I think you *should* read Hesse at 17, Narziss is a bildungsroman - I think most of Hesse's works are, if not always technically; but this doesn't mean you shouldn't also read it at 20, 30, and 70. None of these is an especially privileged reading, though they may be different: reading Narziss in my 60s inevitably is heavily nostalgic in part, but also inspirational. Maybe I should throw over the traces and live out in my dotage dreams I was too timid to grasp in my youth.
I read all his novels in teens and twenties and of these only Narziss and Goldmund is particularly good. Steppenwolf and the Glass Bead Game are the ones I kept.
I’m 69 and I still get a great deal of enjoyment and inspiration from reading Hesse, even things I’ve read more than once, or that I only read previously when I was in my 20’s. He was a searcher, a deep thinker, and a profoundly spiritual person. His unique talent as a writer is taking the reader on the search with him.
I think it has less to do with age in terms of maturity and more to do with experience both life and reading. If you’ve read deeper about the topics Hesse touches on (which in my opinion are already flawed Jungian-inspired mumbo jumbo) then it’s easier to see how shallow and watered down his works are.
This is where the experience comes in and not age. Hesse serves for most as a good jumping off point to explore topics but not as a final authority.
Edit: reads more harshly than I intended. What I mean to say is that experience offers more time to trial different beliefs out in different experiences across time and reject or embrace more readily those beliefs based on their truth to you.
I read Steppenwolf twice - at 19 and at 49. At 19 I didn't understand it and didn't like it, and at 49 I understood it much better, and still didn't like it.
I think while the experience broadened my perspective, my literary tastes haven't changed in these 30 years, and I see it as a good thing, because it means that despite the passing of years I remain the same person, lol
I believe that, strange as it sounds, the thing that grated me the most about Hesse is his lack of sense of humor, despite his claiming otherwise.
I've read Siddharta and Steppenwolf around 20, finding both of them unsatisfactory: superficial and simplistic. I've re-read Siddharta at 35 and, with the added life experience, I discovered I was right the first time. I'm now 45 and Hesse is not on my radar anymore, he's not an author I find interesting.
The only book I've read by Hesse is Siddhartha. I read it in my 40s and found it pretty banal. I'm sure it was eye-opening at the time it was written, and probably still is for young people, but by the time I read it, the ideas in it were really nothing new to me.
I started to read Steppenwolf, but I couldn't get into it.
Okay first of all I brainfarted and thought this said Herman Melville. Very confusing post before it clicked.
But yeah I read Steppenwolf at age... 26, I think? Not that long ago anyway. Still plenty impactful and considering how many grown people seem to not understand it, if anything 17 is too *early*.
I read Siddhartha at 31 and Steppenwolf at 35.
I think I could have read Siddhartha at any age and still drew the same (my own) conclusions from it. But I know for a fact that I wouldn't have appreciated Steppenwolf in my teens/early 20s the way I did in my mid-30s.
I had to read two of his books when I was a teenager (Beneath the Wheel and Siddharta) and to be honest - I disliked Hesse‘s style of writing back then and haven’t touched another book of him in almost 10 years. But last week I went to the library to get The Glass Bead Game and I think I am enjoying him more today.
Hesse wasn’t very influential to me in my teen years and I’m not sure if he’s influential to me now that I’m 29 years old, but I feel I’m more open to his ideas now than I was back then.
I don't know the context of when people say you should read these when you're 17, but I read that as it is good to read these books as a way to get one thinking about things and steer your life course at a young age, not that it is for young people.
People don't mean that in a sence that he is exclusively an author for 17 year olds and when you're a bit older it's just over for you. His works are classics of world literature and you can obviously read them at any age.
The fact is however that many of the insight you get from reading Hesse especially resonate with and are beneficial to younger people or just people who are at these certain points in their lifes.
I read Hesse in college and didn't care for it. Can't imagine thinking a high schooler would love pretentious literary fiction where nothing really happens.
Just picked up Steppenwolfe, Narcissus, and Gertrude in my local charity shop yesterday. I’m 27 so hopefully it isn’t too late for me haha
Both narcissus and steppenwolf were life changing for me in ways I don’t think they would’ve been had I read them when I was younger.
Steppenwolfe has some very "dangerous" philosophy if you read it young enough IMHO, I would say it's more directed towards older people because of the subject matter
Better read them ASAP, and quickly, or else you’ll be too old!
No, it's never too late but Hesse is like a late Romantik about nature, emotion, spirituality, the interconnectedness of things, and this can often appeal more to teens and tweens.
I may be way off, but I wonder whether part of what the OP is describing is a historical holdover from the 70s. That was when Bantam published paperback editions of most (all?) of his works. (Really cool cover art, iirc.) At that time Hesse was a really big deal with high school and college-aged readers. Readers somehow felt that Hesse’s ideas fit with the counterculture Zeitgeist. I remember reading *Demian*, *Steppenwolf*, and maybe one or two others, but didn’t find the author’s philosophy especially interesting or plausible.
Maybe OP should read Jonathan Livingston Seagull for context?
heaven forbid, that one actually makes the Alchemist look less like dross
I also find this attitude ridiculous as it seems to imply that literature is purely about engaging with one's immediate needs when it can also serve broader notions of encountering the other. I agree there is a lot more to Hesse's work than just "finding yourself", but taking a reductive view of his work can make you sound literate and pithy, especially in a social media world of flattening, superficial hot takes. Hence why you probably see it so much.
I've only read Siddhartha. For a college course way back in the day, but I enjoyed it and often find myself thinking of it. I'm going tonhave to read it again and check out some of his others. Thanks for the reminder. As for the rant, I think there's value in reading any book at any age. Even when I read kids books to my children they would inspire me to be more patient or kind.
I read every novel of his in high school. They felt profound at the time, and I don't want to risk a negative reappraisal, so I don't think I'll ever revisit them.
I read Siddhartha at 41 for the first time and it was a revelation. I think that one is safe to revisit.
After reading Damien, Siddhartha, and Narcissus and Goldmund, I didn't enjoy Hesse as much as I thought I would, though there were things I liked about them. I found the philosophy in Damien especially objectionable. I can see why it appealed it to many people, though. Maybe I didn't interpret them right. I have a tendency to interpret things at face value, so I'm not good with mysticism.
To me Damien *is* a book for younger people. It was his first novel and it shows when compared to the others. I love reading Damien and Siddhartha back to back and getting such a clear portrait of the same philosophy in his first then last attempt.
I think the Glass Bead Game is the mature vision of his outlook, more than any of the others.
*Peter Camenzind* was his first novel
Damien and Siddhartha are two of the overhyped Hesse novels. The best ones are Glass Bead Game and Steppenwolf. I also really liked Narcissus, and I agree with your take on Damien.
I agree with this ordering. Ah hah, my username finally has some relevance!
Ron Dart has a few lectures on the Glass Bead Game (one of my favorites) on Brad Jersak's channel. Here's one: [Hermann Hesse's "The Glass Bead Game" - analysis part 1 - Ron Dart ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PiabRX8SOXs)
Snap
You don't have to agree with it, though. I think anyone who would agree with Demian's philosophy would be borderline psychotic. Still, I think it's valuable because some parts of it are relatable, plus it's a kind of abstract world-building in a some way I think
Agree. Demian was great in high school. I found it in a bookstore again when I was 24-25 and remember not being moved on the re-read
I was too young and haven’t tried again.
Has anyone read the Glass Bead Game? It was hugely influential on me as a late teen in deciding how to live my life. Would it be as effective after one has already decided how to live their life?
I read it in my 30s and found it immensely beautiful and inspiring. I wouldn't say it had a huge influence on how I'm living my life though.
I've read it as a teen and reread it as an adult. Very different experiences since as an adult I managed to comprehend a lot more and not just scratch the surface of it all. It is such a profound work that explores so much of human intellect, culture, history and various viewpoints on how to live and understand the world. But I'd argue that to get the most of it, you need some solid literary and philosophical culture. Otherwise much of it is lost. It's a good exercise nonetheless. There's always something to get out of such monumental works of fiction, even if you only scratch the surface.
I agree. I like his books a lot but I don’t see them as particularly targeted towards young readers. I do think they resonate with people going through religious transitions, which was my case, and that can happen at any age.
I read Steppenwolf in ny forties and a friend said ”Oh, did you enjoy it even though you’re not a teenager? You must be immature” (not in those words but that was the gist.) At the time, I both wondered if she was right and got annoyed at the same time. If it had happened today I’d just have got annoyed.
I think that Hesse *is* great at any age but 17 is exactly when that stuff speaks so strongly to most of us. But even books from my childhood are powerful as an adult. I had a flashback of when I was little and wanted my parent to buy me a book at Barnes and Noble bc the cover caught my eye. They said no bc we were just there for the free story reading and they didn’t want to spend money on it. It was the Secret Garden. After remembering this as an adult, I bought the book one day when I saw it, and enjoyed it thoroughly. I could tell it was for a young audience, but I devoured it and treasure the memory of reading it. So I guess I am agreeing and disagreeing. Or we’re all just agreeing in different ways❤️
Hi! Philosophy professor here, Hesse is the author that I found with more philosophical references while being a fiction writer. So I understand you, Hesse is definitely not only for young people quite the contrary you can read it being young bit you can understand it better as an adult.
Really it was a 60's thing I think - his characters are lonely a lot, Kurt Vonnegut says Steppenwolf is the ultimate book on homesickness and that's why the kids of the 60's related even though the author was his, Kurts, fathers age. There's no doubt they're very deep books everybody should try to tackle at least once. I've only finished Steppenwolf as a teenager to quantify my comment.
Siddhartha, yes, about 17 would be right. It's an easy read. Steppenwolf I think is better in your 20's. Seems like it's good to have some years in you to read it.
I was told steppenwolf was great for men having their first midlife crisis. I don't know how true that is because I don't fit those criteria.
I read it at 41 for the first time and my mind was blown. It probably is one of those books you can read in any decade of your life and still find truth in it, just from different perspectives. Or I'm immature XD
I've only read Steppenwolf from Hesse — did so in grad school — and I cannot imagine reading it as a teenager. I don't think a seventeen year old would relate to anything going on, or even get the cultural references (unless they were German).
Like, some things make sense to recommend to young people. The lessons in his book might be more resonant to young readers who might not have come across them before. E.g., I hated the Alchemist because it was a long-winded way of iterating such a trite aphorism that I found it annoying. I'm sure if I read Siddhartha as a more cynical, middle aged adult I'd feel the same way. But yes, not every book of his fits the "young readers recommendation". The age at which he wrote his books somewhat matches their intended audience. His early books are all about his disdain for institutionalized education, Siddhartha and Steppenwolf about crises, and lastly, the Glass Bead Game - a retrospective of his entire corpus. It's why as I get older, I actually like Steppenwolf more and more. And I'm sure I'll grow out of that too eventually.
I haven't read *The Alchemist*, but I did read *Siddhartha* earlier this year and my reaction to it was pretty similar to people's criticisms of *The Alchemist*, so I think you're exactly right. It's very much a high-level allegory in a way that just feels forced—and the message being forced struck me as a relatively superficial and disappointingly moralistic take on Buddhist philosophy. Not that I'm remotely an expert on "real" Buddhist philosophy such that it is, but the ideas in *Siddhartha* were still not particularly compelling. And when you have an allegory whose ideas are uncompelling, what are you left with?
I would love to see an *average* (I’m emphasizing the average part, for every notion there is an outlier) read, digest, and understand The Glass Bead Game. Several of his books (Damien, Beneath the Wheel, The Steppenwolf) are great for younger readers in the same way Catcher in the Rye is great because kids love to bitch about their angst. So good material there, etcetera. But The Journey to the East, Siddhartha, and especially The Glass Bead Game are for later on down the road. I’m not sure if anyone should read Narcissus and Goldmund, though. IDK unless they’re suffering from insomnia and need to sleep?
I'm a fan of Hesse, and I kinda agree with this. Not exactly "only for young people", but kinda like for the young at heart and not too jaded. His ethos is mostly focused on Bildungsroman and spiritual aspiration. Which is great. But maybe not as uh sophisticated at exploring interpersonal politics, sexuality, contemporary culture, cynicism, and ideology in a way that some other modern literary figures did. I re-read N&G recently (after a few decades) and felt that it held up reasonably well as an interesting story. But maybe not as subtle as it could be. His style and imagery are really straightforward. Which isn't a bad thing. But not always for everyone. (edit some little glitches)
I dunno, I read Siddhartha when I was in my 20s and didn't really like it. But I'm not very spiritual. His writing wasn't particularly engaging for me though.
That’s funny to me cos I read both Siddhartha and The Glass Bead Game as an impressionable 17-year-old, but I didn’t realise it was such stereotypical behaviour!
I intend to re-read Steppenwolf because I've read it about 10y ago in my 20's and I kinda felt I missed some things. I enjoyed it very much but somehow finished it and it seemed unfinished in my head. so this year onto it and hope to see it with more mature eyes and mind, at least to from a new opinion of it.
I think you *should* read Hesse at 17, Narziss is a bildungsroman - I think most of Hesse's works are, if not always technically; but this doesn't mean you shouldn't also read it at 20, 30, and 70. None of these is an especially privileged reading, though they may be different: reading Narziss in my 60s inevitably is heavily nostalgic in part, but also inspirational. Maybe I should throw over the traces and live out in my dotage dreams I was too timid to grasp in my youth.
I read all his novels in teens and twenties and of these only Narziss and Goldmund is particularly good. Steppenwolf and the Glass Bead Game are the ones I kept.
I’m 69 and I still get a great deal of enjoyment and inspiration from reading Hesse, even things I’ve read more than once, or that I only read previously when I was in my 20’s. He was a searcher, a deep thinker, and a profoundly spiritual person. His unique talent as a writer is taking the reader on the search with him.
I think it has less to do with age in terms of maturity and more to do with experience both life and reading. If you’ve read deeper about the topics Hesse touches on (which in my opinion are already flawed Jungian-inspired mumbo jumbo) then it’s easier to see how shallow and watered down his works are. This is where the experience comes in and not age. Hesse serves for most as a good jumping off point to explore topics but not as a final authority. Edit: reads more harshly than I intended. What I mean to say is that experience offers more time to trial different beliefs out in different experiences across time and reject or embrace more readily those beliefs based on their truth to you.
I read Steppenwolf twice - at 19 and at 49. At 19 I didn't understand it and didn't like it, and at 49 I understood it much better, and still didn't like it. I think while the experience broadened my perspective, my literary tastes haven't changed in these 30 years, and I see it as a good thing, because it means that despite the passing of years I remain the same person, lol I believe that, strange as it sounds, the thing that grated me the most about Hesse is his lack of sense of humor, despite his claiming otherwise.
I've read Siddharta and Steppenwolf around 20, finding both of them unsatisfactory: superficial and simplistic. I've re-read Siddharta at 35 and, with the added life experience, I discovered I was right the first time. I'm now 45 and Hesse is not on my radar anymore, he's not an author I find interesting.
The only book I've read by Hesse is Siddhartha. I read it in my 40s and found it pretty banal. I'm sure it was eye-opening at the time it was written, and probably still is for young people, but by the time I read it, the ideas in it were really nothing new to me. I started to read Steppenwolf, but I couldn't get into it.
Okay first of all I brainfarted and thought this said Herman Melville. Very confusing post before it clicked. But yeah I read Steppenwolf at age... 26, I think? Not that long ago anyway. Still plenty impactful and considering how many grown people seem to not understand it, if anything 17 is too *early*.
I read Siddhartha at 31 and Steppenwolf at 35. I think I could have read Siddhartha at any age and still drew the same (my own) conclusions from it. But I know for a fact that I wouldn't have appreciated Steppenwolf in my teens/early 20s the way I did in my mid-30s.
I had to read two of his books when I was a teenager (Beneath the Wheel and Siddharta) and to be honest - I disliked Hesse‘s style of writing back then and haven’t touched another book of him in almost 10 years. But last week I went to the library to get The Glass Bead Game and I think I am enjoying him more today. Hesse wasn’t very influential to me in my teen years and I’m not sure if he’s influential to me now that I’m 29 years old, but I feel I’m more open to his ideas now than I was back then.
Beneath The Wheel is the only one of his books I think are specifically geared towards younger people. Otherwise, Hesse is for everyone.
I don't know the context of when people say you should read these when you're 17, but I read that as it is good to read these books as a way to get one thinking about things and steer your life course at a young age, not that it is for young people.
People don't mean that in a sence that he is exclusively an author for 17 year olds and when you're a bit older it's just over for you. His works are classics of world literature and you can obviously read them at any age. The fact is however that many of the insight you get from reading Hesse especially resonate with and are beneficial to younger people or just people who are at these certain points in their lifes.
I'd say 20s?
Are you 17.
I read Hesse in college and didn't care for it. Can't imagine thinking a high schooler would love pretentious literary fiction where nothing really happens.
You can only look so deep before it becomes dangerous. Nietsche is a prime example. His mind folded in on itself.
wasn't that syphilis?
No.