Section 2:
Aschenbach is presented to the reader’s minds as a man whose passions have been held in check, never allowed to be expressed in either his life or works of art. This introduction to him is broken by an important symbol in the book, the first red haired man which he shortly after this encounter does what he has never done before, as a cure to his writers block he goes to visit Venice. Already placed out of his originally stern but brilliantly bland mould by the guiding figure of the red haired man seen from across the graveyard, Aschenbach’s entrance to the city of Venice by boat is likened to the ferry of Charon (the ancient Greek mythology telling of the dead entering the underworld), this note along with the spotting of another red headed figure/guide allows for the idea that Aschenbach is like the dead entering Hell.
‘The Plague’ set is a town slightly secluded, separate from the view of the ocean, which is commonly seen as a symbol of life and freedom, but only barely. The introduction of the town noting that it is just out of view of the ocean already sets it up as a town entrapped by something. The common aspect between the characters explored in this text is their reliance of habits within their daily retinue. This reliance is played across to the readers as if the people are trapped by these habits. Their life prior to the introduction of plague can almost to deducted to be devoid of meaning. This compared to ‘Death in Venice’ where prior to coming to Venice Aschenbach has a successful career and life, while it is devoid of multiple emotion, it is not devoid of meaning (while it may be lacking).
From here it can be argued that in ‘The Plague’ their reaction to the introduction of their stimulant does akin itself to Aschenbach’s because it allows us to see a reinforcement of what is already apparent to us as readers, the fact that these people are entrapped by their habits. While both Aschenbach and the characters out of ‘The Plague’ are both slaves to their habits (Aschenbach by way of suppressing latent emotion) before the stimulation makes them not free prior to what is generically trapping them. Therefore in ‘The Plague’ the reality of their situation is that the stimulant gives some of the people affected the chance to realise this meaningless in their life and make their own choice as to whether to remain with a life devoid of meaning or to attempt to give their life meaning making them free of oppression and bringing them to the status of human. ‘Death in Venice’ comparison to this is that the stimulant pokes a hole in the dam Aschenbach has created for his emotions within himself. This means that as Aschenbach progresses through Venice/Hell he comes to bring out his latency, through guidance by his red headed devils, in a much more powerful flood of emotion than would be expected (due to the length of time his river of emotion has been building up, flooding his insides). This release is almost a compensation for the years he has supressed his full human potential (which would be to allow all emotion to be assessed even if it isn’t allowed to run wild). This may mean that the books explore the extent to which the characters create meaning and redeem their human status.
It should be noted that there is nothing wrong with habit only unexamined habit. An example of the examining of habit within ‘The Plague’ is the old Spaniard, he responds to plague and death by habitually continuing to count pees. While this may not seem to be an examination of his habits it is clear he has examined them by his response to Rieux, he is sick with suspected plague but has managed to slowly get better and explain to Rieux how he counts his pees’, he notes his habit but also realises to a certain extent their power. The only way habits are dangerous is when they are used to deny the reality. Here is where the two books differ, while ‘the Plague’ explores the many different reactions possible to have to it’s stimulants while ‘Death in Venice’ explores one response and one situation but it manages to delve deeper into their response. This is seen by in ‘the Plague’ has it’s stimulant withdrawn (plague/death) showing responses up to that point in time and then what would happen after the removal (would people recline to unchecked habit?), while this is happening in ‘Death in Venice’ the stimulant is unrelenting and continues almost only for the reason to show the readers what happens if you take the wrong steps. ‘Death in Venice’ explores deeper than ‘The Plague’ allowing for a greater amount of information about our character to be revealed.
Section 3:
If the books can be reduced to observations the observation made in ‘The Plague’ is that those who react in a way which allows them to solidify what they have chosen to fill their life with (Tarrou with the sanitary squad, Panalou with supporting his followers, Rieux by devoting himself to doctoring in all circumstances) hold on to it until the very end (Tarrou and Panalou) have managed themselves to gain human status and will receive a symbol of their freedom (for Rieux and Tarrou this symbol is they swim in the freeing, open ocean). Then the lesson explored is a different reaction will lead to a different result, take Tarrou for an example he chose a noble reaction to fight in the sanitary squad but in the end was taken by plague. ‘Death in Venice’ has the observation that this reaction to emotion more or less supports the reality that man can’t live on the extremes of emotion for extended periods without consequences, therefore balance is required. Aschenbach moves form the brilliantly bland man into Hell with guidance from his despised red headed guides, his extreme changes from bland to overflowing with pent up emotional interference transforming him into a red headed man/guide (demon).
