Klaus Mann

Klaus Mann

We are searching data for your request:

Forums and discussions:
Manuals and reference books:
Data from registers:
Wait the end of the search in all databases.
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.

Klaus Mann, the son of the novelist, Thomas Mann, was born in Munich on 18th November 1906. His mother, Katia Pringsheim Mann, was the daughter of a wealthy, Jewish industrialist family who owned coal mines and early railroads. (1)

His sister, Erika Mann, had been born the previous year. Erika and Klaus looked so much alike and were so emotionally close, they were known as "the twins". They both dressed similarly and celebrated their birthdays on the same date." They were followed by Gottfried (1909), Monika (1910), Elisabeth (1918) and Michael (1919). (2)

Although his mother came from a Jewish family, all the six children were baptised as Protestants. The Mann were considered to be very unconventional: "Mann had tainted his new family with scandal. It would trail him for years; literary gossip recounted how Katia strolled hand-in-hand with her brother Klaus; while the Mann's oldest children, Erika and Klaus, with their penchant for shared wardrobes, appeared to some observers the 1920s answer to Siegmund and Sieglinde." (3)

At the age of eleven, Klaus nearly died of a reptured appendix. (4) According to Colm Tóibín, Thomas Mann made clear his own sexual interest in Klaus (nicknamed Eissi). In 1920, when Klaus was 14, he wrote in his diary: "Am enraptured with Eissi... terribly handsome in his swimming trunks. Find it quite natural that I should fall in love with my son... It seems I am once and for all done with women?... Eissi was lying tanned and shirtless on his bed, reading; I was disconcerted." Later that year he wrote, "came upon Eissi totally nude" and was "deeply struck by his radiant adolescent body; overwhelming". (5)

With a group of friends, Erika and Klaus, they founded an experimental theater troupe, the Laienbund Deutscher Mimiker. In 1924 Klaus wrote Anja and Esther, a play about "a neurotic quartet of four boys and girls" who "were madly in love with each other". The following year he was approached by the actor Gustaf Gründgens, who wanted to direct the play with himself in one of the male roles, Klaus in the other; Erika Mann and Pamela Wedekind, the daughter of the playwright Frank Wedekind, would be the two young women. "Klaus planned to marry Pamela, with whom Erika fell in love, while Erika arranged to marry Gustaf, with whom Klaus began an affair." (6)

The play, which opened in Hamburg in October 1925, attracted vast amounts of publicity, partly because of its scandalous content and partly because it starred three children of two famous writers. A photograph appeared on the cover of Berliner Illustrierte Zeitung. It created a great deal of controversy as "Klaus's lipstick gave him the look of a transvestite". (7)

The Mann family lived in luxury. Gottfried later wrote, "thanks to the Nobel Prize and the tremendous earnings of The Magic Mountain. They took trips, they ate and drank well, and two large cars stood in the garage: an open American car and a German limousine. When they went to the theatre, the chauffeur waited in the lobby with their fur coats at the end of the performance. This style of life, which they went to no trouble to conceal, made their growing number of political enemies hate them all the more". (8)

Anthony Heilbut, the author of Thomas Mann: Eros and Literature (1995), has commented: "Klaus Mann was gifted with charm, almost overburdened with status - a canny performer who had learned from cabaret stage and sexual prowl to gauge his public. He made himself at home everywhere, disregarding geographic borders, collapsing one time period into another, history into autobiography. He was almost too easy to psychoanalyze." (9)

On 24th July, 1926, Erika Mann married Gustaf Gründgens, but the marriage was not successful. In 1927, she and Klaus traveled around the world. (10) On her return to Germany she divorced Gründgens, who was sympathetic to the Nazi Party. She began a passionate affair with Pamela Wedekind, who at that time was engaged to her brother, Klaus Mann. Erika also had a relationship with the actress Therese Giehse, and appeared in the film about lesbianism Mädchen in Uniform (1931). It was a great success but because of its subject matter it was banned in the United States. (11)

Colm Tóibín has pointed out that during this period Erika and Klaus "wrote articles and books and made outrageous statements; they travelled, they had many lovers. Erika worked in the theatre and appeared in films, Klaus wrote more plays. In other words, they took full advantage of the freedoms offered by the Weimar Republic. For many in the Nazi Party, they were the epitome of all that was wrong with Germany. And their mother’s Jewish background didn’t endear them to the National Socialists either." (12)

Klaus remained engaged to Pamela Wedekind until her marriage to Carl Sternheim. He continued to write and by 1932 he had published a dozen books and several plays. As Hermann Kurzke points out: "His plays for the theatre provoke scandals but appear on the great stages in Hamburg and Berlin, in Vienna and Munich." (13)

Klaus and Erika Mann joined together with a group of left-wing activists, including Therese Giehse, Walter Mehring, Magnus Henning, Wolfgang Koeppen and Lotte Goslar, to establish a cabaret in Munich called Die Pfeffermühle (The Peppermill). (14)

The production opened on 1st January, 1933. Klaus and Erika wrote most of the material, much of which was anti-Fascist. It ran for two months next door to the local Nazi headquarters, and, since it was so successful, was preparing to move to a larger theatre when the Reichstag went up in flames. Erika and Klaus were on a skiing holiday while the new theatre was being decorated and arrived back in Munich to be warned by the family chauffeur, that they were in danger. Later, Klaus wrote that the chauffeur "had been a Nazi spy throughout the four or five years he lived with us... But this time he had failed in his duty, out of sympathy, I suppose. For he knew what would happen to us if he informed his Nazi employers of our arrival in town." (15)

Adolf Hitler gained power in January 1933. Soon afterwards, a large number of writers were declared to be "degenerate authors". This included Heinrich Mann, Bertolt Brecht, Hans Eisler, Ernst Toller, Thomas Heine, Arnold Zweig, Ludwig Renn, Karl Marx, Sigmund Freud, Franz Kafka and Hermann Hesse. On 10th May, the Nazi Party arranged the burning of thousands of "degenerate literary works" were burnt in German cities. (16)

However, Thomas Mann's work still remained popular in Germany and unlike his brother, Heinrich, had made no statements attacking the regime. His biographer, Hermann Kurzke, has argued that during the period before he took power, Mann developed friendships with some significant figures in the Nazi Party: "Does that make Thomas Mann a precursor of Fascism? He certainly made an effort to stay out of the way of the resurgent right-wing movement of the time. Very early on in the summer of 1921, he took note of the rising Nazi movement and dismissed it as ‘swastika nonsense’. As early as 1925 when Hitler was still imprisoned in Landsberg, he rejected the cultural barbarity of German Fascism with an extensive, decisive and clearly visible gesture." (17) However, others had pointed out, he had always been careful not to attack Hitler in print. (18)

Thomas Mann was on holiday in France when Hitler took power. Erika and Klaus were warned by the family chauffeur that the Mann family were in danger. (19) Later, Klaus wrote that the chauffeur "had been a Nazi spy throughout the four or five years he lived with us... For he knew what would happen to us if he informed his Nazi employers of our arrival in town." (20)

Erika made contact with her parents, and warned them not to return to Munich. Mann, who was on holiday at the time, was warned that he faced the possibility of being arrested if he returned to Germany. In September, 1933, Thomas, Katia, Gottfried, Monika, Elisabeth and Michael Mann settled in Küsnacht, near Zurich. Erika and Klaus decided to remain in Germany to continue the fight against fascism. (21)

Klaus Mann went to live in Amsterdam, where he worked for the exile magazine Die Sammlung, which attacked Adolf Hitler and his government in Nazi Germany. In 1934 Klaus Mann published the first part of his autobiography, Journey into Freedom. (22)

The following year Klaus wrote to his mother that his publisher, Fritz Helmut Landshoff, made him a "relatively generous offer", where he was to receive a monthly wage to write a novel. (23) Klaus originally intended to write a utopian novel about Europe in the 22nd century. The author Hermann Kesten suggested that he write a novel about a homosexual who is willing to compromise his ideals in order to have a successful career under Hitler. (24)

Klaus accepted his advice and based his novel on his former friend and brother-in-law, Gustaf Gründgens, who was the artistic director of the Prussian State Theatre and was later appointed a member of the Prussian state council by Hermann Göring. Gründgens also starred in several propaganda films. He was also director of Berlin's principal theatre, the Staatstheater. One critic claimed that "Gründgens is emblematic of the intellectual who chooses ego and career, even in the service of monsters, over principle." (25)

The novel, Mephisto (1936), portrays an actor Hendrik Höfgen (Gustaf Gründgens), who in his youth was a communist. However, unlike, Gründgens, he is not homosexual as Klaus was himself gay. He decided to use "negroid masochism" as the main character's sexual preference. In 1933, when Hitler gains power, he flees to Paris, because he expects to be persecuted for his left-wing activities. However, he is persuaded to return to Germany and takes the role of Mephisto. There are situations where Höfgen tries to help his friends or to complain about concentration camps, but he is always concerned not to lose his Nazi patrons. (26)

In 1938, Erika and Klaus reported on the Spanish Civil War. On their return to the United States the FBI kept a close watch on them. They were suspected of being secret supporters of the Communist Party of the United States. The FBI snoopers speculated that Erika may have had a sexual relationship with her brother, Klaus. "Confidential informants" told agents that the two were having an affair, one file reports. Erika Mann was described in the files as having her hair cut "in a short mannish bob with a part on the right side" and to be close to a group of political actors who were "members of the Hebrew race". In 1940 Erika agreed to work with the FBI and gave information on members of the German exile community, who she suspected of pro-Nazi connections. (27) As an anti-fascist Klaus saw nothing wrong with American communists. (28)

Klaus Mann was a frequent FBI target. Even his postman was recruited as an informant. Klaus attracted attention partly because of his left wing politics, but also because of his homosexuality. FBI files refer to Klaus as "a well-known sexual pervert" with "communistic sympathies". When he stayed in the Bedford Hotel in New York City, an informant reported that a soldier "with fair complexion and dirty blond hair" stayed overnight with him regularly. (29)

Soon after the outbreak of the Second World War, Klaus and Erika Mann published The Other Germany (1940). In the book they argued: "Germany's structure... is regional. The Germans do not care to, and do not actually, accept dictation from Berlin. There are, moreover, simply too many Germans in Europe for one state. An empire comprising all Germans would always constitute an implied threat and a source of unrest for the Continent... The land of Europe's middle, the mediator between North and South, East and West, has no mission to rule, but the more profound and noble mission to unite and reconcile."

One reviewer claimed: "The Manns are weak on analysis of the tremendous economic problem that will arise if the totalitarian state is defeated. But their book is a strong and pertinent reminder of the cultural resilience and political talent Germany displayed under the Weimar Republic (whose constitution was as liberal a one as Europe had ever seen). If Europe after World War II is to be federal, as they hope, the Manns provide a logical line on the neglected question as to what sort of Germany should take part in the federation." (30)

Klaus returned with his parents to the US and sought citizenship only to find that he was once more under investigation by the FBI. So were his friends such as Hans Eisler and Bertolt Brecht were ordered to appear before the Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC). Eisler and Brecht both decided to leave the country. Mann described the behaviour of members of the HUAC such as John Rankin and J. Parnell Thomas as "fascistic". In his diary he wrote: "What oath would Congressman Rankin or Thomas take if forced to swear that they hated fascism as much as Communism?" (31)

Klaus Mann made several attempts to kill himself. (32) While in Los Angeles in 1948 he attempted suicide by slitting his wrists, taking pills and turning on the gas. Thomas Mann wrote to a friend: "My two sisters committed suicide, and Klaus has much of the elder sister in him. The impulse is present in him, and all the circumstances favour it – the one exception being that he has a parental home on which he can always rely." (33)

At the beginning of January 1949, Klaus Mann wrote in his diary: "I do not wish to survive this year." (34) In April, in Cannes, he received a letter from a West German publisher to say that his novel, Mephisto, could not be published in the country because of the objections of Gustaf Gründgens (the book is a thinly-disguised portrait of Gründgens, who abandoned his conscience to ingratiate himself with the Nazi Party). (35)

Klaus wrote to Erika about his problems with his publisher and his financial difficulties. "I have been luck with my family. One cannot be entirely lonely if one belongs to something and is part of it." (36) Klaus Mann died in of an overdose of sleeping pills on 21st May 1949. (37)

Erika and Thomas Mann were in Stockholm when they heard the news. Thomas wrote: "My inward sympathy with the mother’s heart and with Erika. He should not have done this to them... The hurtful, ugly, cruel inconsideration and irresponsibility." (38) Thomas wrote to Hermann Hesse: "This interrupted life lies heavily on my mind and grieves me. My relationship to him was difficult and not free of guilt. My life put his in a shadow right from the beginning." (39)

Thomas Mann decided not to attend his son’s funeral or interrupt his lecture tour. Later, Elisabeth Mann would say of Erika: "When Klaus died, she was totally, totally heartbroken - I mean that was unbearable for her, that loss. That hit her harder than anything else in her life." (40)

Thomas and Katia Mann had six children. It was clear from early on that Katia most loved the second child, Klaus, who was born in 1906, and that Thomas loved Erika, the eldest, born in 1905, and also Elisabeth, born in 1918. The other three – the barely tolerated ones – were Golo, born in 1909, Monika, born in 1910, and Michael, born in 1919. Erika remembered a time during the shortages of the First World War when food had to be divided but there was one fig left over. "What did my father do? He gave this fig just to me alone . the other three children stared in horror, and my father said sententiously with emphasis: “One should get the children used to injustice early."

Some things ran in the family. Homosexuality, for instance. Thomas himself was gay most of the time, as his diaries make clear. So were three of his children: Erika (also just most of the time; she made an exception for Bruno Walter, among others), Klaus and Golo. Suicide was a family theme too. Both of Thomas Mann’s sisters committed suicide, as did his sons Klaus and Michael, as did the second wife of his brother Heinrich. Also, gerontophilia. Bruno Walter was almost as old as Erika’s father; and in 1939 Elisabeth married the literary critic Giuseppe Antonio Borgese, who was 36 years her senior.

And then there is the small matter of incest. Much interest in this was fuelled by incidents in Thomas Mann’s own work. In her useful and sympathetic book about the Mann family, In the Shadow of the Magic Mountain, Andrea Weiss writes: ‘Just how much Katia and Klaus Pringsheim loved each other was the subject of public gossip and private distress, especially when Thomas Mann, married to Katia for only a few months, used his wife’s relationship with her brother as the basis for one of his novellas.’ The novella, Blood of the Walsungs, dealt with the incestuous relationship between a twin brother and sister; Katia’s father attempted to have the story suppressed.

Such rumours also existed about Erika and Klaus, much encouraged by Klaus’s play on the subject, The Siblings, and made their way into Gestapo reports when the siblings went into exile and FBI reports about them once they arrived in America. (In the mid-1920s Klaus helped to keep things in the family by having an affair with Erika’s first husband, Gustaf Gründgens.) In his novel The Volcano, Klaus allowed the character based on his sister to marry the character based on his father. In Thomas Mann’s The Holy Sinner, the hero, Pope Gregorius, marries his mother – who is also his father’s sister.

In his diaries Thomas Mann made clear his own sexual interest in Klaus: "Am enraptured with Eissi," he wrote in 1920, when Klaus was 14 (Eissi was his nickname), "terribly handsome in his swimming trunks. Eissi was lying tanned and shirtless on his bed, reading; I was disconcerted." Later that year he "came upon Eissi totally nude and up to some nonsense by Golo’s bed" and was "deeply struck by his radiant adolescent body; overwhelming". He used some of this same language to describe Jacob’s interest in the young Joseph in Joseph and His Brothers, and in the novella Disorder and Early Sorrow, written when Elisabeth was seven, the relationship between the bookish father and his young daughter, clearly based on Mann’s relationship with Elisabeth, is heated and fervid enough to make any reader marvel at what a wonderfully daring imagination the old magician was in possession of.

Adolf Hitler's Early Life (Answer Commentary)

Adolf Hitler and the First World War (Answer Commentary)

Adolf Hitler and the German Workers' Party (Answer Commentary)

Sturmabteilung (SA) (Answer Commentary)

Adolf Hitler and the Beer Hall Putsch (Answer Commentary)

Adolf Hitler the Orator (Answer Commentary)

An Assessment of the Nazi-Soviet Pact (Answer Commentary)

British Newspapers and Adolf Hitler (Answer Commentary)

Lord Rothermere, Daily Mail and Adolf Hitler (Answer Commentary)

Adolf Hitler v John Heartfield (Answer Commentary)

The Hitler Youth (Answer Commentary)

German League of Girls (Answer Commentary)

Night of the Long Knives (Answer Commentary)

The Political Development of Sophie Scholl (Answer Commentary)

The White Rose Anti-Nazi Group (Answer Commentary)

Kristallnacht (Answer Commentary)

Heinrich Himmler and the SS (Answer Commentary)

Trade Unions in Nazi Germany (Answer Commentary)

Hitler's Volkswagen (The People's Car) (Answer Commentary)

Women in Nazi Germany (Answer Commentary)

The Assassination of Reinhard Heydrich (Answer Commentary)

The Last Days of Adolf Hitler (Answer Commentary)

(1) Richard Winston, Thomas Mann: The Making of an Artist (1982) page 225

(2) Frederic Spotts, Cursed Legacy: The Tragic Life of Klaus Mann (2016) page 6

(3) Anthony Heilbut, Thomas Mann: Eros and Literature (1995) page 196

(4) Hermann Kurzke, Thomas Mann (2002) page 274

(5) Colm Tóibín, London Review of Books (6th November, 2006)

(6) Colm Tóibín, London Review of Books (6th November, 2006)

(7) Anthony Heilbut, Thomas Mann: Eros and Literature (1995) page 437

(8) Colm Tóibín, London Review of Books (6th November, 2006)

(9) Anthony Heilbut, Thomas Mann: Eros and Literature (1995) page 441

(10) Time Magazine (10th October, 1938)

(11) Gwendolyn Audrey Foster, Women Film Directors: An International Bio-Critical Dictionary (1995) page 322

(12) Colm Tóibín, London Review of Books (6th November, 2006)

(13) Hermann Kurzke, Thomas Mann (2002) page 274

(14) Time Magazine (10th October, 1938)

(15) Colm Tóibín, London Review of Books (6th November, 2006)

(16) Peter Hoffmann, The History of German Resistance (1977) page 15

(17) Hermann Kurzke, Thomas Mann (2002) page 264

(18) Colm Tóibín, New Ways to Kill Your Mother: Writers and Their Families (2013) page 196

(19) Andrea Weiss, In the Shadow of the Magic Mountain: The Erika and Klaus Mann Story (2008) page 88

(20) Colm Tóibín, London Review of Books (6th November, 2006)

(21) Anthony Heilbut, Thomas Mann: Eros and Literature (1995) page 530

(22) Andrea Weiss, In the Shadow of the Magic Mountain: The Erika and Klaus Mann Story (2008) pages 99-100

(23) Klaus Mann, letter to Katia Mann (21st July 1935)

(24) Andrea Weiss, In the Shadow of the Magic Mountain: The Erika and Klaus Mann Story (2008) page 126

(25) Stefan Steinberg, The Rehabilitation of Gustav Gründgens (29th December 1999)

(26) Andrea Weiss, In the Shadow of the Magic Mountain: The Erika and Klaus Mann Story (2008) page 126

(27) Martin Kettle, The Guardian (22nd September, 2000)

(28) Andrea Weiss, In the Shadow of the Magic Mountain: The Erika and Klaus Mann Story (2008) page 117

(29) Martin Kettle, The Guardian (22nd September, 2000)

(30) Time Magazine (26th February, 1940)

(31) Thomas Mann, diary entry (5th October, 1947)

(32) Anthony Heilbut, Thomas Mann: Eros and Literature (1995) page 453

(33) Colm Tóibín, London Review of Books (6th November, 2006)

(34) Klaus Mann, diary entry (1st January, 1949)

(35) Colm Tóibín, London Review of Books (6th November, 2006)

(36) Klaus Mann, letter to Erika Mann (20th May, 1949)

(37) Andrea Weiss, In the Shadow of the Magic Mountain: The Erika and Klaus Mann Story (2008) page 239

(38) Thomas Mann, diary entry (May, 1949)

(39) Thomas Mann, letter to Hermann Hesse (6th July, 1949)

(40) Colm Tóibín, London Review of Books (6th November, 2006)

Klaus Mann

Klaus Heinrich Thomas Mann (born November 18, 1906 in Munich , † May 21, 1949 in Cannes , France ) was a German-speaking writer . Thomas Mann's eldest son began his literary career during the Weimar Republic as an outsider, as he dealt with topics in his early work that were considered taboo at the time . After his emigration from Germany in 1933, a major reorientation took place in the subject matter of his works: Klaus Mann became a combative writer against National Socialism . As an exile , he took American citizenship in 1943 . The rediscovery of his work in Germany did not take place until many years after his death. Today, Klaus Mann is considered to be one of the most important representatives of German-language exile literature after 1933.

The Fourth Industrial Revolution: what it means, how to respond

We stand on the brink of a technological revolution that will fundamentally alter the way we live, work, and relate to one another. In its scale, scope, and complexity, the transformation will be unlike anything humankind has experienced before. We do not yet know just how it will unfold, but one thing is clear: the response to it must be integrated and comprehensive, involving all stakeholders of the global polity, from the public and private sectors to academia and civil society.

The First Industrial Revolution used water and steam power to mechanize production. The Second used electric power to create mass production. The Third used electronics and information technology to automate production. Now a Fourth Industrial Revolution is building on the Third, the digital revolution that has been occurring since the middle of the last century. It is characterized by a fusion of technologies that is blurring the lines between the physical, digital, and biological spheres.

There are three reasons why today’s transformations represent not merely a prolongation of the Third Industrial Revolution but rather the arrival of a Fourth and distinct one: velocity, scope, and systems impact. The speed of current breakthroughs has no historical precedent. When compared with previous industrial revolutions, the Fourth is evolving at an exponential rather than a linear pace. Moreover, it is disrupting almost every industry in every country. And the breadth and depth of these changes herald the transformation of entire systems of production, management, and governance.

The possibilities of billions of people connected by mobile devices, with unprecedented processing power, storage capacity, and access to knowledge, are unlimited. And these possibilities will be multiplied by emerging technology breakthroughs in fields such as artificial intelligence, robotics, the Internet of Things, autonomous vehicles, 3-D printing, nanotechnology, biotechnology, materials science, energy storage, and quantum computing.

Already, artificial intelligence is all around us, from self-driving cars and drones to virtual assistants and software that translate or invest. Impressive progress has been made in AI in recent years, driven by exponential increases in computing power and by the availability of vast amounts of data, from software used to discover new drugs to algorithms used to predict our cultural interests. Digital fabrication technologies, meanwhile, are interacting with the biological world on a daily basis. Engineers, designers, and architects are combining computational design, additive manufacturing, materials engineering, and synthetic biology to pioneer a symbiosis between microorganisms, our bodies, the products we consume, and even the buildings we inhabit.

Challenges and opportunities

Like the revolutions that preceded it, the Fourth Industrial Revolution has the potential to raise global income levels and improve the quality of life for populations around the world. To date, those who have gained the most from it have been consumers able to afford and access the digital world technology has made possible new products and services that increase the efficiency and pleasure of our personal lives. Ordering a cab, booking a flight, buying a product, making a payment, listening to music, watching a film, or playing a game—any of these can now be done remotely.

In the future, technological innovation will also lead to a supply-side miracle, with long-term gains in efficiency and productivity. Transportation and communication costs will drop, logistics and global supply chains will become more effective, and the cost of trade will diminish, all of which will open new markets and drive economic growth.

At the same time, as the economists Erik Brynjolfsson and Andrew McAfee have pointed out, the revolution could yield greater inequality, particularly in its potential to disrupt labor markets. As automation substitutes for labor across the entire economy, the net displacement of workers by machines might exacerbate the gap between returns to capital and returns to labor. On the other hand, it is also possible that the displacement of workers by technology will, in aggregate, result in a net increase in safe and rewarding jobs.

We cannot foresee at this point which scenario is likely to emerge, and history suggests that the outcome is likely to be some combination of the two. However, I am convinced of one thing—that in the future, talent, more than capital, will represent the critical factor of production. This will give rise to a job market increasingly segregated into “low-skill/low-pay” and “high-skill/high-pay” segments, which in turn will lead to an increase in social tensions.

In addition to being a key economic concern, inequality represents the greatest societal concern associated with the Fourth Industrial Revolution. The largest beneficiaries of innovation tend to be the providers of intellectual and physical capital—the innovators, shareholders, and investors—which explains the rising gap in wealth between those dependent on capital versus labor. Technology is therefore one of the main reasons why incomes have stagnated, or even decreased, for a majority of the population in high-income countries: the demand for highly skilled workers has increased while the demand for workers with less education and lower skills has decreased. The result is a job market with a strong demand at the high and low ends, but a hollowing out of the middle.

This helps explain why so many workers are disillusioned and fearful that their own real incomes and those of their children will continue to stagnate. It also helps explain why middle classes around the world are increasingly experiencing a pervasive sense of dissatisfaction and unfairness. A winner-takes-all economy that offers only limited access to the middle class is a recipe for democratic malaise and dereliction.

Discontent can also be fueled by the pervasiveness of digital technologies and the dynamics of information sharing typified by social media. More than 30 percent of the global population now uses social media platforms to connect, learn, and share information. In an ideal world, these interactions would provide an opportunity for cross-cultural understanding and cohesion. However, they can also create and propagate unrealistic expectations as to what constitutes success for an individual or a group, as well as offer opportunities for extreme ideas and ideologies to spread.

The impact on business

An underlying theme in my conversations with global CEOs and senior business executives is that the acceleration of innovation and the velocity of disruption are hard to comprehend or anticipate and that these drivers constitute a source of constant surprise, even for the best connected and most well informed. Indeed, across all industries, there is clear evidence that the technologies that underpin the Fourth Industrial Revolution are having a major impact on businesses.

On the supply side, many industries are seeing the introduction of new technologies that create entirely new ways of serving existing needs and significantly disrupt existing industry value chains. Disruption is also flowing from agile, innovative competitors who, thanks to access to global digital platforms for research, development, marketing, sales, and distribution, can oust well-established incumbents faster than ever by improving the quality, speed, or price at which value is delivered.

Major shifts on the demand side are also occurring, as growing transparency, consumer engagement, and new patterns of consumer behavior (increasingly built upon access to mobile networks and data) force companies to adapt the way they design, market, and deliver products and services.

A key trend is the development of technology-enabled platforms that combine both demand and supply to disrupt existing industry structures, such as those we see within the “sharing” or “on demand” economy. These technology platforms, rendered easy to use by the smartphone, convene people, assets, and data—thus creating entirely new ways of consuming goods and services in the process. In addition, they lower the barriers for businesses and individuals to create wealth, altering the personal and professional environments of workers. These new platform businesses are rapidly multiplying into many new services, ranging from laundry to shopping, from chores to parking, from massages to travel.

On the whole, there are four main effects that the Fourth Industrial Revolution has on business—on customer expectations, on product enhancement, on collaborative innovation, and on organizational forms. Whether consumers or businesses, customers are increasingly at the epicenter of the economy, which is all about improving how customers are served. Physical products and services, moreover, can now be enhanced with digital capabilities that increase their value. New technologies make assets more durable and resilient, while data and analytics are transforming how they are maintained. A world of customer experiences, data-based services, and asset performance through analytics, meanwhile, requires new forms of collaboration, particularly given the speed at which innovation and disruption are taking place. And the emergence of global platforms and other new business models, finally, means that talent, culture, and organizational forms will have to be rethought.

Overall, the inexorable shift from simple digitization (the Third Industrial Revolution) to innovation based on combinations of technologies (the Fourth Industrial Revolution) is forcing companies to reexamine the way they do business. The bottom line, however, is the same: business leaders and senior executives need to understand their changing environment, challenge the assumptions of their operating teams, and relentlessly and continuously innovate.

The impact on government

As the physical, digital, and biological worlds continue to converge, new technologies and platforms will increasingly enable citizens to engage with governments, voice their opinions, coordinate their efforts, and even circumvent the supervision of public authorities. Simultaneously, governments will gain new technological powers to increase their control over populations, based on pervasive surveillance systems and the ability to control digital infrastructure. On the whole, however, governments will increasingly face pressure to change their current approach to public engagement and policymaking, as their central role of conducting policy diminishes owing to new sources of competition and the redistribution and decentralization of power that new technologies make possible.

Ultimately, the ability of government systems and public authorities to adapt will determine their survival. If they prove capable of embracing a world of disruptive change, subjecting their structures to the levels of transparency and efficiency that will enable them to maintain their competitive edge, they will endure. If they cannot evolve, they will face increasing trouble.

This will be particularly true in the realm of regulation. Current systems of public policy and decision-making evolved alongside the Second Industrial Revolution, when decision-makers had time to study a specific issue and develop the necessary response or appropriate regulatory framework. The whole process was designed to be linear and mechanistic, following a strict “top down” approach.

But such an approach is no longer feasible. Given the Fourth Industrial Revolution’s rapid pace of change and broad impacts, legislators and regulators are being challenged to an unprecedented degree and for the most part are proving unable to cope.

How, then, can they preserve the interest of the consumers and the public at large while continuing to support innovation and technological development? By embracing “agile” governance, just as the private sector has increasingly adopted agile responses to software development and business operations more generally. This means regulators must continuously adapt to a new, fast-changing environment, reinventing themselves so they can truly understand what it is they are regulating. To do so, governments and regulatory agencies will need to collaborate closely with business and civil society.

The Fourth Industrial Revolution will also profoundly impact the nature of national and international security, affecting both the probability and the nature of conflict. The history of warfare and international security is the history of technological innovation, and today is no exception. Modern conflicts involving states are increasingly “hybrid” in nature, combining traditional battlefield techniques with elements previously associated with nonstate actors. The distinction between war and peace, combatant and noncombatant, and even violence and nonviolence (think cyberwarfare) is becoming uncomfortably blurry.

As this process takes place and new technologies such as autonomous or biological weapons become easier to use, individuals and small groups will increasingly join states in being capable of causing mass harm. This new vulnerability will lead to new fears. But at the same time, advances in technology will create the potential to reduce the scale or impact of violence, through the development of new modes of protection, for example, or greater precision in targeting.

The Fourth Industrial Revolution, finally, will change not only what we do but also who we are. It will affect our identity and all the issues associated with it: our sense of privacy, our notions of ownership, our consumption patterns, the time we devote to work and leisure, and how we develop our careers, cultivate our skills, meet people, and nurture relationships. It is already changing our health and leading to a “quantified” self, and sooner than we think it may lead to human augmentation. The list is endless because it is bound only by our imagination.

I am a great enthusiast and early adopter of technology, but sometimes I wonder whether the inexorable integration of technology in our lives could diminish some of our quintessential human capacities, such as compassion and cooperation. Our relationship with our smartphones is a case in point. Constant connection may deprive us of one of life’s most important assets: the time to pause, reflect, and engage in meaningful conversation.

One of the greatest individual challenges posed by new information technologies is privacy. We instinctively understand why it is so essential, yet the tracking and sharing of information about us is a crucial part of the new connectivity. Debates about fundamental issues such as the impact on our inner lives of the loss of control over our data will only intensify in the years ahead. Similarly, the revolutions occurring in biotechnology and AI, which are redefining what it means to be human by pushing back the current thresholds of life span, health, cognition, and capabilities, will compel us to redefine our moral and ethical boundaries.

Neither technology nor the disruption that comes with it is an exogenous force over which humans have no control. All of us are responsible for guiding its evolution, in the decisions we make on a daily basis as citizens, consumers, and investors. We should thus grasp the opportunity and power we have to shape the Fourth Industrial Revolution and direct it toward a future that reflects our common objectives and values.

To do this, however, we must develop a comprehensive and globally shared view of how technology is affecting our lives and reshaping our economic, social, cultural, and human environments. There has never been a time of greater promise, or one of greater potential peril. Today’s decision-makers, however, are too often trapped in traditional, linear thinking, or too absorbed by the multiple crises demanding their attention, to think strategically about the forces of disruption and innovation shaping our future.

In the end, it all comes down to people and values. We need to shape a future that works for all of us by putting people first and empowering them. In its most pessimistic, dehumanized form, the Fourth Industrial Revolution may indeed have the potential to “robotize” humanity and thus to deprive us of our heart and soul. But as a complement to the best parts of human nature—creativity, empathy, stewardship—it can also lift humanity into a new collective and moral consciousness based on a shared sense of destiny. It is incumbent on us all to make sure the latter prevails.

This article was first published in Foreign Affairs

Author: Klaus Schwab is Founder and Executive Chairman of the World Economic Forum

Image: An Aeronavics drone sits in a paddock near the town of Raglan, New Zealand, July 6, 2015. REUTERS/Naomi Tajitsu


Mesolithic Edit

The Isle of Man effectively became an island around 8,500 years ago at around the time when rising sea levels caused by the melting glaciers cut Mesolithic Britain off from continental Europe for the last time. A land bridge had earlier existed between the Isle of Man and Cumbria, but the location and opening of the land bridge remain poorly understood. [2]

The earliest traces of people on the Isle of Man date back to the Mesolithic Period, also known as the Middle Stone Age. The first residents lived in small natural shelters, hunting, gathering and fishing for their food. They used small tools made of flint or bone, examples of which have been found near the coast. Representatives of these artifacts are kept at the Manx National Heritage museum.

Neolithic to Bronze Age Edit

The Neolithic Period marked the coming of farming, improved stone tools and pottery. During this period megalithic monuments began to appear around the island. Examples are found at Cashtal yn Ard near Maughold, King Orry's Grave in Laxey, Meayll Circle near Cregneash, and Ballaharra Stones in St John's. The builders of the megaliths were not the only culture during this time there are also remains of the local Ronaldsway culture (lasting from the late Neolithic into the Bronze Age).

Iron Age Edit

The Iron Age marked the beginning of Celtic cultural influence. Large hill forts appeared on hill summits and smaller promontory forts along the coastal cliffs, whilst large timber-framed roundhouses were built.

It is likely that the first Celts to inhabit the Island were Brythonic tribes from mainland Britain. The secular history of the Isle of Man during the Brythonic period remains mysterious. It is not known if the Romans ever made a landing on the island and if they did, little evidence has been discovered. There is evidence for contact with Roman Britain as an amphora was discovered at the settlement on the South Barrule it is hypothesised this may have been trade goods or plunder. It has been speculated that the island may have become a haven for Druids and other refugees from Anglesey after the sacking of Mona in AD 60.

It is generally assumed that Irish invasion or immigration formed the basis of the modern Manx language Irish migration to the island probably began in the 5th century AD. This is evident in the change in language used in Ogham inscriptions. The transition between Manx Brythonic (a Brythonic language like modern Welsh) and Manx Gaelic (a Goidelic language like modern Scottish Gaelic and Irish) may have been gradual. One question is whether the present-day Manx language survives from pre-Norse days or reflects a linguistic reintroduction after the Norse invasion. The island lends its name to Manannán, the Brythonic and Gaelic sea god who is said in myth to have once ruled the island.

Early Middle Ages Edit

Tradition attributes the island's conversion to Christianity to St Maughold (Maccul), an Irish missionary who gives his name to a parish. There are the remains of around 200 tiny early chapels called keeils scattered across the island. Evidence such as radiocarbon dating and magnetic drift points to many of these being built around AD 550–600.

The Brythonic culture of Manaw appears throughout early British tradition and later Welsh writings. The family origins of Gwriad ap Elidyr (father of Merfyn Frych and grandfather of Rhodri the Great) are attributed to a Manaw and he is sometimes named as Gwriad Manaw. [3] The 1896 discovery of a cross inscribed Crux Guriat (Cross of Gwriad) and dated to the 8th or 9th century greatly supports this theory. [4]

The best record of any event before the incursions of the Northmen is attributed to Báetán mac Cairill, king of Ulster, who (according to the Annals of Ulster) led an expedition to Man in 577–578, imposing his authority on the island (though some have thought this event may refer to Manau Gododdin between the Firths of Clyde and Forth, rather than the Isle of Man). After Báetán's death in 581, his rival Áedán mac Gabráin, king of Dál Riata, is said to have taken the island in 582.

Even if the supposed conquest of the Menavian islands – Mann and Anglesey – by Edwin of Northumbria, in 616, did take place, it could not have led to any permanent results, for when the English were driven from the coasts of Cumberland and Lancashire soon afterwards, they could not well have retained their hold on the island to the west of these coasts. [ citation needed ] One can speculate, however, that when Ecgfrið's Northumbrians laid Ireland waste from Dublin to Drogheda in 684, they temporarily occupied Mann.

Viking Age and Norse kingdom Edit

The period of Scandinavian domination is divided into two main epochs – before and after the conquest of Mann by Godred Crovan in 1079. Warfare and unsettled rule characterise the earlier epoch, the later saw comparatively more peace.

Between about AD 800 and 815 the Vikings came to Mann chiefly for plunder. Between about 850 and 990, when they settled, the island fell under the rule of the Scandinavian Kings of Dublin and between 990 and 1079, it became subject to the powerful Earls of Orkney.

There was a mint producing coins on Mann between c. 1025 and c. 1065. These Manx coins were minted from an imported type 2 Hiberno-Norse penny die from Dublin. Hiberno-Norse coins were first minted under Sihtric, King of Dublin. This illustrates that Mann may have been under the thumb of Dublin at this time.

Little is known about the conqueror, Godred Crovan. According to the Chronicon Manniae he subdued Dublin, and a great part of Leinster, and held the Scots in such subjection that supposedly no one who set out to build a vessel dared to insert more than three bolts. The memory of such a ruler would be likely to survive in tradition, and it seems probable therefore that he is the person commemorated in Manx legend under the name of King Gorse or Orry. He created the Kingdom of Mann and the Isles in around 1079 including the south-western islands of Scotland until 1164, when two separate kingdoms were formed from it. In 1154, later known as the Diocese of Sodor and Man, was formed by the Catholic Church.

The islands under his rule were called the Suðr-eyjar (South isles, in contrast to the Norðr-eyjar North isles", i.e. Orkney and Shetland), consisting of the Hebrides, all the smaller western islands of Scotland, and Mann. At a later date his successors took the title of Rex Manniae et Insularum (King of Mann and of the Isles). The kingdom's capital was on St Patrick's Isle, where Peel Castle was built on the site of a Celtic monastery.

Olaf, Godred's son, exercised considerable power and according to the Chronicle, maintained such close alliance with the kings of Ireland and Scotland that no one ventured to disturb the Isles during his time (1113–1152). In 1156 his son Godred (reigned 1153–1158), who for a short period also ruled over Dublin, lost the smaller islands off the coast of Argyll as a result of a quarrel with Somerled (the ruler of Argyll). An independent sovereignty thus appeared between [ clarification needed ] the two divisions of his kingdom.

In the 1130s the Catholic Church sent a small mission to establish the first bishopric on the Isle of Man, and appointed Wimund as the first bishop. He soon afterwards embarked with a band of followers on a career of murder and looting throughout Scotland and the surrounding islands.

During the whole of the Scandinavian period, the Isles remained nominally under the suzerainty of the Kings of Norway but the Norwegians only occasionally asserted it with any vigour. The first such king to assert control over the region was likely Magnus Barelegs, at the turn of the 12th century. It was not until Hakon Hakonarson's 1263 expedition that another king returned to the Isles.

Decline of Norse rule Edit

From the middle of the 12th century until 1217 the suzerainty had remained of a very shadowy character Norway had become a prey to civil dissensions. But after that date it became a reality, and Norway consequently came into collision with the growing power of the kingdom of Scotland.

Early in the 13th century, when Ragnald (reigned 1187–1229) paid homage to King John of England (reigned 1199–1216), we hear for the first time of English intervention in the affairs of Mann. But a period of Scots domination would precede the establishment of full English control.

Finally, in 1261, Alexander III of Scotland sent envoys to Norway to negotiate for the cession of the isles, but their efforts led to no result. He therefore initiated a war, which ended in the indecisive Battle of Largs against the Norwegian fleet in 1263. However, the Norwegian king Haakon Haakonsson died the following winter, and this allowed King Alexander to bring the war to a successful conclusion. Magnus Olafsson, King of Mann and the Isles (reigned 1252–1265), who had campaigned on the Norwegian side, had to surrender all the islands over which he had ruled, except Mann, for which he did homage. Two years later Magnus died and in 1266 King Magnus VI of Norway ceded the islands, including Mann, to Scotland in the Treaty of Perth in consideration of the sum of 4,000 marks (known as merks in Scotland) and an annuity of 100 marks. But Scotland's rule over Mann did not become firmly established till 1275, when the Manx suffered defeat in the decisive Battle of Ronaldsway, near Castletown.

English dominance Edit

In 1290 King Edward I of England sent Walter de Huntercombe to seize possession of Mann, and it remained in English hands until 1313, when Robert Bruce took it after besieging Castle Rushen for five weeks. In about 1333 King Edward III of England granted Mann to William de Montacute, 3rd Baron Montacute (later the 1st Earl of Salisbury), as his absolute possession, without reserving any service to be rendered to him.

Then, in 1346, the Battle of Neville's Cross decided the long struggle between England and Scotland in England's favour. King David II of Scotland, Robert Bruce's last male heir, had been captured in the Battle of Neville's cross and ransomed however, when Scotland was unable to raise one of the ransom installments, David made a secret agreement with King Edward III of England to cancel it, in return for transferring the Scottish kingdom to an English prince.

Following the secret agreement, there followed a confused period when Mann sometimes experienced English rule and sometimes Scottish. In 1388 the island was "ravaged" by Sir William Douglas of Nithsdale on his way home from the destruction of the town of Carlingford. [5]

In 1392 William de Montacute's son sold the island, including sovereignty, to Sir William le Scrope. In 1399 Henry Bolinbroke brought about the beheading of Le Scrope, who had taken the side of Richard II when Bolinbroke usurped the throne and appointed himself Henry IV. The island then came into the de facto possession of Henry, who granted it to Henry Percy, 1st Earl of Northumberland but following the latter's later attainder, Henry IV, in 1405, made a lifetime grant of it, with the patronage of the bishopric, to Sir John Stanley. In 1406 this grant was extended – on a feudatory basis under the English Crown – to Sir John's heirs and assigns, the feudal fee being the service of rendering homage and two falcons to all future Kings of England on their coronations.

With the accession of the Stanleys to the throne there begins a more settled epoch in Manx history. Though the island's new rulers rarely visited its shores, they placed it under governors, who, in the main, seem to have treated it with the justice of the time. Of the thirteen members of the family who ruled in Mann, the second Sir John Stanley (1414–1432), James, the 7th Earl (1627–1651), and the 10th Earl of the same name (1702–1736) had the most important influence on it. They first curbed the power of the spiritual barons [ clarification needed ] , introduced trial by jury, which superseded trial by battle, and ordered the laws to be written. The second, known as the Great Stanley, and his wife, Charlotte de la Tremoille (or Tremouille), are probably the most striking figures in Manx history.

Wars of the Three Kingdoms and Interregnum 1642 to 1660 Edit

Shortly after the Wars of the Three Kingdoms began in June 1643, James Stanley, 7th Earl of Derby returned to Mann to find the island on the brink of rebellion. Among the causes were complaints at the level of tithes payable to the Church of England, and Derby's attempts to replace the Manx ‘tenure of straw’ by which many of his tenants held their lands, a customary tenure akin to freehold, with commercial leases. He managed to restore the situation through a series of meetings, but made minimal concessions. [6]

Six months after Charles I was executed on 30 January 1649, Derby received a summons from General Ireton to surrender the island, but declined to do so. In August 1651, he and 300 Manxmen landed in Lancashire to take part in the Third English Civil War defeated at Wigan Lane on 25 August 1651, Derby escaped with only 30 troops to join Charles II. Captured after the Battle of Worcester in September, he was imprisoned in Chester Castle, tried by court-martial and executed at Bolton on 15 October. [6]

Soon after Stanley's death, the Manx Militia, under the command of William Christian (known by his Manx name of Illiam Dhone), rose against the Countess and captured all the insular forts except Rushen and Peel. They were then joined by a Parliamentarian force sent from the mainland, led by Colonels Thomas Birch and Robert Duckenfield, to whom the Countess surrendered after a brief resistance. [7]

Oliver Cromwell had appointed Thomas Fairfax "Lord of Mann and the Isles" in September 1651, so that Mann continued under a monarchical government and remained in the same relation to England as before.

1660 Restoration Edit

The restoration of Stanley government in 1660 therefore caused as little friction and alteration as its temporary cessation had. One of the first acts of the new Lord, Charles Stanley, 8th Earl of Derby, was to order Christian to be tried. He was found guilty and executed. Of the other persons implicated in the rebellion only three were excepted from the general amnesty. But by Order in Council, Charles II pardoned them, and the judges responsible for the sentence on Christian were punished.

Charles Stanley's next act was to dispute the permanency of the tenants' holdings, which they had not at first regarded as being affected by the acceptance of leases, a proceeding which led to an almost open rebellion against his authority and to the neglect of agriculture, in lieu of which the people devoted themselves to the fisheries and to contraband trade.

Charles Stanley, who died in 1672, was succeeded first by his son William Richard George Stanley, 9th Earl of Derby until his death in 1702.

The agrarian question subsided only in 1704, when James Stanley, 10th Earl of Derby, William's brother and successor, largely through the influence of Bishop Wilson, entered into a compact with his tenants, which became embodied in an Act, called the Act of Settlement. Their compact secured the tenants in the possession of their estates in perpetuity subject only to a fixed rent, and a small fine on succession or alienation. From the great importance of this act to the Manx people it has been called their Magna Carta. As time went on, and the value of the estates increased, the rent payable to the Lord became so small in proportion as to be almost nominal, being extinguished by purchase in 1916.

Revestment Edit

James died in 1736, and the suzerainty of the isle passed to James Murray, 2nd Duke of Atholl, his first cousin and heir-male. In 1764 he was succeeded by his only surviving child Charlotte, Baroness Strange, and her husband, John Murray, who (in right of his wife) became Lord of Mann. In about 1720 the contraband trade had greatly increased. In 1726 Parliament had checked it somewhat for a time, but during the last ten years of the Atholl regime (1756–1765) it assumed such proportions that, in the interests of the Imperial revenue, it became necessary to suppress it. With a view to so doing, Parliament passed the Isle of Man Purchase Act 1765 (commonly called the Revestment Act by the Manx), under which it purchased the rights of the Atholls as Lords of Mann, including the customs revenues of the island, for the sum of £70,000 sterling, and granted an annuity to the Duke and Duchess. The Atholls still retained their manorial rights, the patronage of the bishopric, and certain other perquisites, until they sold them for the sum of £417,144 in 1828.

Up to the time of the revestment, Tynwald had passed laws concerning the government of the island in all respects and had control over its finances, subject to the approval of the Lord of Mann. After the revestment, or rather after the passage of the Smuggling Act 1765 (commonly called the Mischief Act by the Manx), the Parliament at Westminster legislated with respect to customs, harbours and merchant shipping, and, in measures of a general character, it occasionally inserted clauses permitting the enforcement in the island of penalties in contravention of the Acts of which they formed part. It also assumed the control of the insular customs duties. Such changes, rather than the transference of the full suzerainty to the King of Great Britain and Ireland, modified the (unwritten) constitution of the Isle of Man. Its ancient laws and tenures remained untouched, but in many ways the revestment affected it adversely. The hereditary Lords of Mann had seldom, if ever, functioned as model rulers, but most of them had taken some personal share in its government, and had interested themselves in the well-being of the inhabitants. But now the whole direction of its affairs became the work of officials who regarded the island as a pestilent nest of smugglers, from which it seemed their duty to extract as much revenue as possible.

There was some alleviation of this state of things between 1793 and 1826, when John Murray, 4th Duke of Atholl served as governor, since, though he quarrelled with the House of Keys and unduly cared for his own pecuniary interests, he did occasionally exert himself to promote the welfare of the island. After his departure the English officials resumed their sway, but they showed more consideration than before. Moreover, since smuggling, which the Isle of Man Purchase Act had only checked – not suppressed – had by that time almost disappeared, and since the Manx revenue had started to produce a large and increasing surplus, the authorities looked more favourably on the Isle of Man, and, thanks to this fact and to the representations of the Manx people to British ministers in 1837, 1844 and 1853, it obtained a somewhat less stringent customs tariff and an occasional dole towards erecting its much neglected public works.

Since 1866, when the Isle of Man obtained a nominal measure of Home Rule, the Manx people have made remarkable progress, and currently form a prosperous community, with a thriving offshore financial centre, a tourist industry (albeit smaller than in the past) and a variety of other industries.

The Isle of Man was a base for alien civilian internment camps in both the First World War (1914–18) and the Second World War (1939–45). During the First World War there were two camps: one a requisitioned holiday camp in Douglas and the other the purpose-built Knockaloe camp near Peel in the parish of Patrick. During the Second World War there were a number of smaller camps in Douglas, Peel, Port Erin and Ramsey. The (now disbanded) Manx Regiment was raised in 1938 and saw action during the Second World War.

On 2 August 1973, a flash fire killed between 50 and 53 people at the Summerland amusement centre in Douglas. [8]

Greater autonomy Edit

The early-20th century saw a revival of music and dance, and a limited revival of the Manx language - although the last "native" speaker of Manx Gaelic died in the 1970s. In the middle of the 20th century [ when? ] the Taoiseach of the Republic of Ireland, Éamon de Valera, visited, and was so dissatisfied with the lack of support for Manx that he immediately had two recording vans sent over. During the 20th century the Manx tourist economy declined, as the English and Irish started flying to Spain for package holidays. The Manx Government responded to this by successfully promoting the island, with its low tax-rates, as an offshore financial centre, [9] although Man has avoided a place on a 2009 UK blacklist of tax havens. [10] The financial centre has had its detractors who have pointed to the potential for money laundering. [11]

In 1949 an Executive Council, chaired by the Lieutenant-Governor and including members of Tynwald, was established. This marked the start of a transfer of executive power from the un-elected Lieutenant-Governor to democratically elected Manx politicians. Finance and the police passed to Manx control between 1958 and 1976. [12] In 1980 a chairman elected by Tynwald replaced the Lieutenant-Governor as Chairman of the Executive Council. [13] Following legislation in 1984, the Executive Council was reconstituted in 1985 to include the chairmen of the eight principal Boards [14] in 1986 they were given the title of Minister and the chairman was re-titled "Chief Minister". [15] In 1986 Sir Miles Walker CBE became the first Chief Minister of the Isle of Man. In 1990 the Executive Council was renamed the "Council of Ministers". [16]

The 1960s also saw a rise in Manx nationalism, spawning the parties Mec Vannin and the Manx National Party, as well as the now defunct Fo Halloo (literally "Underground"), which mounted a direct-action campaign of spray-painting and attempted house-burning.

On 5 July 1973 control of the postal service passed from the UK General Post Office to the new Isle of Man Post, which began to issue its own postage stamps.

The 1990s and early 21st century have seen a greater recognition of indigenous Manx culture, including the opening of the first Manx-language primary school. [17]

Since 1983 the Isle of Man government has designated more than 250 historic structures as Registered Buildings of the Isle of Man.

Klaus Mann je objavio svoj prvi roman Der fromme Tanz (hr. Pobožni ples) 1925., a poslije toga je pisao novele, eseje, romane i novinske članke. Često je putovao i nastupap zajedno sa svojom godinu dana starijom sestrom Erikom, s kojom je bio vrlo blizak. Zajedno s Pamelom Wedekind (kćerkom Franka Wedekinda) i Gustafom Gründgensom, osnivaju kazališnu skupinu, koja je napravila skandal s komadom Anja i Ester (1925.), koji govori o erotski obojenom prijateljstvu između dvije djevojke u jednom internatu za djevojke.

1933. napušta Njemačku zbog nacizma, kao i ostali članovi obitelji. Roman prvijenac Der fromme Tanz spaljivan je diljem Njemačke od pristalica nacizma. Od 1936. nastanjuje se u SADu, i počinje pisati na engleskom. Klaus Mann, koji je bio homoseksualac, upoznao je 1937. svog američkog partnera Thomasa Quinna Curtiss]a. Kada su SAD ušle u Drugi svjetski rat prijavljuje se kao dragovoljac, i vraća se u Europu kao vojnik.

Klaus Mann je bio ovisnik o morfinu. Njegov otac Thomas Mann ga se javno odrekao kada je Klaus deklarirao svoju homoseksualnost u knjizi Der fromme Tanz. Poslije kapitulacije Njemačke Klaus Mann je izgubio smisao, i poslije 12 godina borbe protiv nacizma izgubio je svoj materinski jezik. Na kraju je počinio samoubojstvo.

Najpoznatije djelo Klausa Mannsa je roman Mephisto, u kojem opisuje prirodu kolaboracionizma. Uzor za glavu osobu u knjizi bio je njegov prijašnji šogor Gustaf Gründgens. Po toj knjizi snimljen je i film Mephisto koji je nagrađen 1981. Oscarom za najbolji strani film.

Njegova autobiografija Prekretnica izdana je na engleskom 1942. (The Turning Point) a posthumno i 1952. na njemačkom (Der Wendepunkt).

Obituary: Golo Mann (CORRECTED)

Angelus Gottfried (Golo) Mann, writer and historian: born Munich 27 March 1909 Professor of Modern History, Olivet College, Michigan 1942-43 served US Army 1943-46 Professor of History, Claremont Men's College, California 1947-57 Professor of History, Stuttgart Technische Hochschule 1960- 64 died Leverkusen, Germany 7 April 1994.

GOLO MANN was a distinguished historian and commentator on current affairs, and a member of the last great European literary dynasty.

He was the second son of Thomas Mann, celebrated for novels such as Death in Venice and Buddenbrooks, the monumental saga about the rise and fall of Lubeck's Hanseatic bourgeoisie that in many respects is a portrayal of the author's own family's development from commercial acumen to artistic sensibility. His older brother Heinrich was also a famous writer, best known for Professor Unrat ('The Blue Angel'). Heinrich was the 'black sheep' of the family, but had a positive influence on the young Golo, who preferred him to his overbearing father.

Golo's youngest brother, Viktor, was a literature professor who wrote a chronicle of the Manns, Wir waren funf ('There Were Five of Us'), in which he describes how Thomas Mann wanted his sons to succeed him in his prosperous cereals business. But when they rejected commerce in favour of writing he sold his business and gave them comfortable allowances.

Golo was christened Angelus Gottfried, a name he found too imposing, so he shortened it to Golo. His childhood was dominated by his unruly elder sister and brother, Erika and Klaus, who both became writers. (Klaus committed suicide in 1949.) Their father was for Golo an intimidating figure. In his magnificent autobiographies, Golo tells how each day was strictly regulated to suit Thomas's writing habits. Mornings were devoted to writing. After lunch and a siesta, Mann would go for a walk, then deal with his extensive correspondence before dinner, which was followed by an hour of music, then bedtime.

In his immense diaries, Thomas Mann evaluates his children's abilities with dispassion: 'Golo is a problematic character.' He himself was the real problem. Erika was his favourite she was beautiful and could amuse him with witty talk and frivolous gossip. But, even when grown-up, Golo and Klaus dreaded mealtimes with their father, to whom they had nothing to say. If either of them was faced by the terrors of dining alone with him, they would make lists of subjects for conversation.

Golo's mother came from Brazil and an entirely different background. She was a gifted musician, emotional rather than intellectual and was adored by Golo. Her influence on her husband was less strong. Golo recalled in a 1989 interview that his father was commercially minded, and said: 'As I'm the son of a good businessman, I'm concerned by the reputation of the products I offer the client. So I want to sell my novels to my public as goods of the highest quality.' Heinrich was a more popular writer, turning out a book a year that in Thomas's eyes were of inferior quality. But he wrote an excellent autobiography in 1946: Ein Zeitalter wird besichtigt ('Perspective of an Era'), in which Golo appears, affectionately portrayed. Golo's mother, Katja, sympathising with the stress Golo felt in his father's presence, enrolled him at the age of 14 as a boarder in a progressive school at Salem on Lake Constance. It helped to liberate him from traumas of life with a father of genius. However, Golo says that after his father achieved world-wide fame in 1924 with The Magic Mountain and received the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1929, he became easier to live with.

Erika and Klaus Mann started writing journalism their first stories and satirical sketches they performed in a cabaret Erika opened, Die Pfeffermuhle ('The Peppermill') - eventually shut down by the Nazis. The pair were always seen together and were known as the Terrible Twenties Twins. They kicked over the traces with Germanic thoroughness, as can be seen from their travel book (New York - Hawaii - Japan - Korea - Russia) Rundherum ('Here, There and Everywhere') a best-seller in 1927. Golo is not mentioned in it. Erika had already married and divorced the actor Gustaf Grundgens and, with Christopher Isherwood and Stephen Spender as go-betweens, had contracted a marriage of convenience with WH Auden in order to obtain the British nationality that would allow her to escape the Nazis and go to the United States.

But Golo had more serious things in mind. Visiting the Manns in 1931, Gide - an expert in the matter - describes in his Journals the vivid beauty of Golo as a young man. Golo was no butterfly, however. He went to Heidelberg to study history and philosophy and was directed by the Christian existentialist philosopher Karl Jaspers in the writing of a thesis on Hegel.

When Hitler became Chancellor in 1933, the Manns left Munich and went to Switzerland. Golo preferred France, where he taught German and history at the Lycee St Cloud and at Rennes University. After a brief stay in Prague, he joined his family in Zurich, in the house on the Kilchberg he was to make his home after the war. In 1940 he volunteered for the French army but because he was regarded as an enemy alien he was interned in French camps. He escaped and reached Marseilles, where he joined up with his uncle Heinrich, Franz Werfel and his wife, Alma, the vivacious widow of Gustav Mahler. From Port Bou, they crossed the Pyrenees into Spain, though their guide wondered if Alma would make it. Golo writes with one of his typical shafts of wit, always more French than Germanic: 'She was always ahead of the group, bounding up the mountain passes like an old nanny goat.'

Golo got on the last ship from Lisbon to the United States, where he taught history at Claremont College in California. After returning to Europe in 1957, he held the chair of political science at Stuttgart and published in 1958 his great history of Germany in the 19th and 20th centuries. Already in 1947 he had proved his ability as an historian with a monograph on Friedrich von der Gentz, and his power as a political thinker culminated in a biography of Wallenstein in 1971. He became one of Germany's most influential intellectuals, and in the Seventies had his own television programme - something his father would have disdained. He was in favour of normalising relations with the East long before the fall of the Berlin Wall but he aroused angry reactions when he called the terrorist activities of the Baader-Meinhof gang 'a new development in the phenomenon of civil war' and demanded the closing of German frontiers to Third World immigrants.

Today, one can visit the Thomas Mann Archive in Zurich. Among the photographs on the staircase are some showing Golo with the family, nearly always standing as far as possible from his father. But when Golo returned to Zurich to escape the pressures of his growing popularity in Germany, he took up residence in the old family home on the Kilchberg, where Thomas Mann's nameplate is still on the door. Golo had refused to remove it.

Viktor Mann was an agricultural banking expert and the uncle of Golo Mann (obituary, 22 April) and not his brother as printed. Golo Mann's paternal grandmother, Julia da Silva-Bruhns, was half-Brazilian but not his mother, who was Katja Pringsheim, a member of a prominent Munich family.

Klaus Mann - History

Drews, Richard Kantorowicz, Alfred, 1899- (ed.) / Verboten and verbrannt, deutsche Literatur 12 Jahre unterdrückt

Copyright 1947 by Heinz Ullstein--Helmut Kindler Verlag.| For information on re-use see: http://digital.library.wisc.edu/1711.dl/Copyright

© This compilation (including design, introductory text, organization, and descriptive material) is copyrighted by University of Wisconsin System Board of Regents.

This copyright is independent of any copyright on specific items within the collection. Because the University of Wisconsin Libraries generally do not own the rights to materials in these collections, please consult copyright or ownership information provided with individual items.

Images, text, or other content downloaded from the collection may be freely used for non-profit educational and research purposes, or any other use falling within the purview of "Fair Use".

In all other cases, please consult the terms provided with the item, or contact the Libraries.

ക്ലൗസ് മാൻ മ്യൂണിക്കിൽ, ജർമ്മൻ എഴുത്തുകാരൻ തോമസ് മാന്റെയും ഭാര്യ കാറ്റിയാ പ്രിങ്ഷെയിമിന്റെയും മകനായി ജനിച്ചു. അദ്ദേഹത്തിന്റെ പിതാവ് ഒരു ലൂഥറൻ ആയിട്ടാണ് ജ്ഞാനസ്നാനം നടത്തിയത്. അദ്ദേഹത്തിന്റെ അമ്മ മതേതര യഹൂദ കുടുംബത്തിൽ നിന്നുള്ളതായിരുന്നു. 1924 -ൽ ചെറുകഥകൾ എഴുതിത്തുടങ്ങി. അടുത്ത വർഷം ബർലിൻ ദിനപത്രത്തിന്റെ നാടക നിരൂപകനായി. അദ്ദേഹത്തിന്റെ ആദ്യ സാഹിത്യ കൃതികൾ 1925 -ൽ പ്രസിദ്ധീകരിച്ചു.

മാന്റെ ആദ്യകാല ജീവിതം അസ്വസ്ഥമായിരുന്നു. അദ്ദേഹത്തിന്റെ സ്വവർഗാനുരാഗം പലപ്പോഴും മതഭ്രാന്തിന്റെ ലക്ഷ്യമായി മാറി. എന്നാൽ തന്റെ പിതാവുമായി ഒരു പ്രയാസകരമായ ബന്ധം ആയിരുന്നു അദ്ദേഹത്തിന് ഉണ്ടായിരുന്നത്. നിരവധി സ്കൂളുകളിൽ കുറച്ചു കാലം മാത്രമേ പഠനം തുടരാൻ കഴിഞ്ഞുള്ളൂ. [1] ഒരു വർഷം മാത്രം പ്രായകുറവുള്ള സഹോദരി എറിക മാനിനൊപ്പം ലോകത്തെമ്പാടും സഞ്ചരിച്ചു. 1927- ൽ അമേരിക്ക സന്ദർശിക്കുകയും, 1929- ൽ ഒരു സഹകരണ യാത്രാവിവരണം ആയി പ്രസിദ്ധീകരിച്ച ഉപന്യാസങ്ങളിൽ അത് റിപ്പോർട്ടു ചെയ്യുകയും ചെയ്തിരുന്നു. [2]

Klaus Mann - History

Drews, Richard Kantorowicz, Alfred, 1899- (ed.) / Verboten and verbrannt, deutsche Literatur 12 Jahre unterdrückt

Copyright 1947 by Heinz Ullstein--Helmut Kindler Verlag.| For information on re-use see: http://digital.library.wisc.edu/1711.dl/Copyright

© This compilation (including design, introductory text, organization, and descriptive material) is copyrighted by University of Wisconsin System Board of Regents.

This copyright is independent of any copyright on specific items within the collection. Because the University of Wisconsin Libraries generally do not own the rights to materials in these collections, please consult copyright or ownership information provided with individual items.

Images, text, or other content downloaded from the collection may be freely used for non-profit educational and research purposes, or any other use falling within the purview of "Fair Use".

In all other cases, please consult the terms provided with the item, or contact the Libraries.

Klaus Mann keeps his personal and love life private. Check back often as we will continue to update this page with new relationship details. Let’s take a look at Klaus Mann’s past relationships, ex-girlfriends, and previous hookups. Klaus Mann prefers not to tell the details of marital status & divorce.

Dating is to describe a stage in a person’s life when he or she is actively pursuing romantic relationships with different people. If two unmarried celebrities are seen in public together, they are often described as “dating” which means they were seen in public together, and it is not clear whether they are merely friends, exploring a more intimate relationship, or are romantically involved.

Watch the video: Unsere besondere Empfehlung: Frauen fühlen sich nicht mehr sicher!