According to V. Ganeshan, a renowned scholar of German studies in India, Hesse did not find the India he was looking for.
1Ganeshan, “Indien,” 206. One of the reasons for this was that he could only travel to Ceylon on his trip to the East. Hesse’s access to India and Indian philosophy was not through a first-hand experience of living in India, rather it was through his maternal grandfather, Dr. Hermann Gundert, who worked as a missionary in India for thirty years. Hesse’s knowledge originated from the books in Gundert’s library, which included Indian religious books and works on India by German Indologists.
2Ganeshan, “Indien,” 205. It is here, we argue, that a process of appropriation of Indian motifs began. Hesse never lived in India; his perspective was developed through his readings and not through personally experiencing Indian philosophy. His insights are borrowed from others’ experiences. This inadvertently lends if not inauthenticity then at least an incompleteness to his view about life in India. Hence, when material from such a worldview is used in fiction it can be considered cultural appropriation from the colonial era. Rickey Lee Bauman aptly describes Hesse’s
Siddhartha as a “European fairytale” that “leaves Eastern spiritual practices behind a misconstrued and idealistic veil.”
3Rickey Lee Bauman, “An Apology for Hermann Hesse’s Siddhartha,” Academia.edu, accessed May 25, 2023, https://www.academia.edu/27110634/An_Apology_for_Hermann_Hesses_Siddhartha.This proposition of cultural appropriation is supported by two historical and logical mismatches that Indian readers find in the book: firstly, Siddhartha and Gautama Buddha are two distinct characters in the book. This is not expected by Indian readers when they pick up the book. It is assumed that Siddhartha is Gautama Buddha before enlightenment, as this was Buddha’s name before the phase of enlightenment. It is only when one comes across Gautama Buddha that one realizes that in Hesse’s novel Siddhartha is not Buddha. Secondly, Indian readers do not find the Indian philosophy they are looking for when they pick up
Siddhartha. Siddhartha’s progression from the Samanas, to Buddha, to a material life, to an enlightened state is not a progression at all from the Indian perspective. Rather it is back and forth movement like a pendulum between material life and spirituality, which is unexpected and unappealing for Indian readers. Contrary to his expectations that
Siddhartha would find widespread resonance in India, Ganeshan states that it took a long time for Hesse to become known in India.
4Ganeshan, “Indien,” 207–8. Lastly, Indian spirituality, be it pious daily practice of religion, the arduous life of Samanas, the path of enlightenment given by Gautama Buddha, or the material and sensual life as given in the Kamasutra, is much more complex than what is presented in the book. This kind of reductionism is another aspect of cultural appropriation.
Hermann Hesse has been a relatively underrated author in India. Translation of his novel into an Indian language has an “exoticism” due to the unmet expectations, which is a selling point. The readers imagine what is portrayed in the novel as one of the possible fictional representations of the past. Through these publications, Hesse’s appropriation of Indian culture and philosophy in
Siddhartha in the 1920s has been translated into Indian language after a century.
5Bauman, “An Apology for Hermann Hesse’s Siddhartha,” 2. The process of re-appropriation of
Siddhartha, a German product, into Indian culture begins when one decides to translate
Siddhartha from its English version, rather than the original German version. The English version is a rich source of something exotic for the Indians to be utilized. Considering that early English translations are now deemed to be out of copyright makes the source text more easily available for translation.