[HN Gopher] Why Read Classic Books? ___________________________________________________________________ Why Read Classic Books? Author : tosh Score : 61 points Date : 2021-03-04 09:52 UTC (2 days ago) (HTM) web link (literaryforge.blog) (TXT) w3m dump (literaryforge.blog) | tanseydavid wrote: | Here's a really great quote (cannot remember who it is attributed | to): | | "Want to learn something new? Read an old book." | coldtea wrote: | Because book quality has nothing to do with release date. | | Books aren't fruit. | | And because "classics" means a huge, multi-century or millenia | long filtering process, where it has been found good, useful, and | insightful for generations upon generations of people. | | Also, because all the best of your modern books will soon enough | be "classics" too, and you'll be as dead as the people who wrote | the older classics. So what makes you think you or your | compotemporary authors have some unique insight just because you | happen to be living at the moment? | | Only a belief in an arrow of progress where non-technical things | (morals, books, ideas) get monotonically better (or at least, | where the dominant vector over time points to better) would | justify not reading the classics. But then again only someone | ignorant enough to not have read the classics would believe such | an idea. So reading the classics will cure you of that too. | | (Even for technical things it's not always the case - there were | civilizations more advanced than those that followed them, or | periods where we went backwards in quality of life, knowledge of | science, etc., for centuries - but at least with technical | knowledge it's possible to amass and improve. You don't amass | morals however, and even the higher moral ideas and ideals can be | used for the worst attrocities). | zozbot234 wrote: | ...Also, because the "classics" are so readily available | online, free of copyright and in easy-to-use, open formats. You | can't really say that about much modern literature; of course | there's plenty of good content on the web, but if you're | actually looking for actual 'literature' meaning stuff that's | been commercially published, that can be quite hard to access | in anything other than dead-tree format. | johnchristopher wrote: | > Also, because all the best of your modern books will soon | enough be "classics" too, and you'll be as dead as the people | who wrote the older classics. | | > So what makes you think you or your compotemporary authors | have some unique insight just because you happen to be living | at the moment? | | Because you just stated in the previous sentence that they are | soon to be considered classic? | | > So reading the classics will cure you of that too. | | ... | doggodaddo78 wrote: | Absolutely right. There are many attitudes in modern life that | apply the new=better consumerism fallacy where it doesn't | belong: code, people, experience, restaurants, ideas, values, | music, art, film, food, literature, and durable goods. Throwing | away ideas, objects, and preferences of the past wholesale | loses the lessons of history, reinvents the wheel, and repeats | said history. | Barrin92 wrote: | >Because book quality has nothing to do with release date. | | Quality has a lot to do with release date, although in the | opposite direction you seem to imply here. Books that have been | part of the discourse for hundreds or thousands of years are | likely of significant value because they have been hammered at, | turned upside-down and kept people engaged for a very long | time. That's a pretty good indicator for their value, and it | also increases the chance that the books are still going to be | relevant in another 50 years. | | So cultural artifacts are actually like reverse-fruit. The | older they are, the likely they have struck a nerve and found | something that's meaningful regardless of what age we happen to | find ourselves in. If you have to choose between a classic and | a random politician's campaign memoir published half a year | ago, picking the former based on age is actually a really good | idea. | doggodaddo78 wrote: | Cabernet Sauvignon ;-) | OJFord wrote: | You can leave it at filtering, really. | | Is there anyone alive and writing today that anyone, seriously, | ranks among the pan-century greats? | | I think it takes time to realise anyway, they're old or dead by | the time it's clear how great they are (or were). | | There's no point naming them, but of the three ~contemporary | authors I thought of, two are dead and one I came to realise | only really had the one hit I was aware of. | doggodaddo78 wrote: | Beauty is in the eye... | | There can be no honest absolute ranking of subjective | artistic works. It's NY Review of Each Other's Books to lull | oneself into ranking apples with oranges. | [deleted] | hirundo wrote: | Because the past is a foreign country, the classics are an | excellent guide to that country, and foreign time travel broadens | your perspective, making you a cultural and chronological | cosmopolitan instead of a hick with the stifling horizons of your | own local spacetime. They embiggen us. | | Plus a lot of them are fun as heck to read, page turners, not at | all difficult, e.g. Pride and Prejudice or The Hunchback of Notre | Dame, The Count of Monte Cristo and so many others. | retrac wrote: | A broader perspective can never hurt. And you can't get more | different than by going back. | | I'm currently reading Sei Shounagon's The Pillow Book. The | author was a woman in the Heian court in Kyoto about 1000 AD, | attendant to the Empress. By tradition it is a collection of | her dairy entries, letters, poetry drafts and other personal | papers, not intended for distribution, at least in the form we | received them. It's unclear if the whole work is even a single | author's. | | I went in expecting not to understand parts of it. And that has | been true. But I also didn't expect to laugh quite so much! At | one point, she has a list of grievances over the aggravations | of daily living and bad etiquette. The more irrelevant and | trifling, the more hyperbolic she is. At one point I fell right | right into it and I was in the scene. I have lived those very | moments. And I feel her same bizarre gulf between the urge to | be polite outside, and the frustration with the people being | impolite on the inside. I am pretty sure I have felt some | shadow of what she felt in Kyoto some thousand years ago. It is | both jarring and pleasing to have that momentary connection to | someone who is about as alien to me, as anyone who has left a | written work could possibly be. | mgreenleaf wrote: | It feels like going back one or two hundred years is, in some | ways, even more of a cultural shift than going to another | country is today. I come across gems all the time that are | products of the times and deeply insightful. Which happens with | interacting with other countries today too. Both are profound | and in similar, but different ways. | Kaibeezy wrote: | The past is a foreign country, and yet people are basically the | same, and subject to the same conceits, failings and heroism | too, whether from thousands of years ago or across the street, | competitors or customers. I frequently thank Thucydides for | that lesson. | | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Peloponnesian... | ajarmst wrote: | I agree on all of that, but advancing age has forced me to | qualify it. I now own more books that I want to read than my | expected life span and average reading speed can support. I | don't regret a single moment spent reading crap genre mind- | candy. I regret every single moment spent forcing myself | through a book that I wasn't enjoying, because it was something | I 'should read'. I don't regret starting any of them, and I've | enjoyed the hell out of some Dickens and Shakespeare, T. S. | Eliot and Tennyson. I studied Latin and Hebrew at school. I've | read half of what Kipling wrote and everything Keri Hulme did. | Hell, I used to _teach_ the publication history of the Bible. | | But I've read four Jane Austen novels (three for credit, one | for a failed shot at a Women's Studies major) and not enjoyed a | moment of the experience. Intellectually, I get the quality of | the work, but it wasn't entertaining. It wasn't pleasant, and | life is just way too short for that. Books, even technical | ones, get about three chapters to make their case now, if I'm | not voluntarily choosing to read it after that, I'm moving on. | loblollyboy wrote: | Bump | ajarmst wrote: | Funny aside: for my sins, I own a complete more-than-a- | ventury old set of leather-bound Jane Austen works, because I | was the family member who was 'into books'. I've promised | myself to make sure they go to someone who will enjoy them | when they pass from my custody. | veddox wrote: | I like reading ,,classical literature", and I find I enjoy a | lot of it more than I expected to. Often I do have to push | myself, because it can take a fair bit of | concentration/perseverance, but it's usually worth it. | | However, I do know the feeling you describe: sometimes, it | just doesn't ,,click". And in that case, I will eventually | move on to the next book, and try not to feel guilty about it | ;-) (I started ,,Paradise Lost" twice. I love the absolutely | epic poetry and vivid imagination, but I still ended up | getting stuck both times...) | jrumbut wrote: | I'm a believer in audiobooks as a great way to experience | the classics, you don't get derailed when there's a lengthy | genealogy or dedication to a long dead patron. It's true to | the original experience of the works too since there was | much more recitation and reading aloud when copies were | scarce. | | So many are free on librivox (or from a library): | https://librivox.org/ | | PS no audiobook version could redeen Paradise Lost for me | either, it was my peast favorite reading in high school. To | paraphrase, better to be ignorant in hell than well read in | heaven if you have to trudge through Milton to get there. | iujjkfjdkkdkf wrote: | Your point is much closer to the articles main question, | which I understand to be "should you force yourself to read | the classics" as opposed to "sould you consider reading | classic literature". | waylandsmithers wrote: | I've been into this idea for a while and even created a side | project to help read the classics instead of social media, or HN | (you can check my profile if interested) | | The books I absolutely hated being forced to read in school have | been much more enjoyable as an adult. | lionhearted wrote: | While we're on the topic, Xenophon's "Anabasis" is probably both | the greatest military memoir of all-time and the greatest | adventure story of all-time. | | Heck, maybe also a candidate for greatest learning-on-the-job and | leadership story too. | | It's really an incredible work. The "Why am I lying here?" | monologue still gives me chills. | | Edit -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anabasis_(Xenophon) | http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/1170 | agomez314 wrote: | When you read about the Classics (stories that have stood the | test of time because of how well they convey human truths), it's | as if you are living a thousand different lives instead of living | just one. As a humanities major working in tech, I observe daily | how the miopia of living with the experience of the present only | can have negative effects on the products it produces. For a | distillation of this thought I recommend reading this short story | (15min) by Anton Chekhov: http://www.eastoftheweb.com/short- | stories/UBooks/Bet.shtml | trendoid wrote: | >As a humanities major working in tech, I observe daily how the | miopia of living with the experience of the present only can | have negative effects on the products it produces. | | Interesting. Is it possible to elaborate on this? I enjoyed the | short story you linked (thank you) but still would like to | understand your unique perspective. | behnamoh wrote: | How about just read reddit and learn about real experiences of | real people? | cambalache wrote: | Yeah the timeless universal appeal of white ,15-25,male, | nerdy American sub-urbanites. They are like 0.001% of | humanity at best (talking historically) | jfk13 wrote: | And that's before you consider that much of what appears on | reddit isn't "real experiences of real people" anyway, it's | self-indulgent, exaggerated or downright made-up rubbish | posted for meaningless "karma". | loblollyboy wrote: | This isn't 2010. There are now female and middle aged | redditors as well | jweir wrote: | It is impossible to understand what has been lost and gained | by looking at the current moment. | zozbot234 wrote: | "Real lived experience" is heavily overrated nowadays, in all | sorts of domains. A bunch of individual anecdotes is not data | - at least not before people have taken the time to tally | them up properly, which usually happens on generation-level | timescales. | BLKNSLVR wrote: | The comment you replied to already answered your question: | | "I observe daily how the miopia of living with the experience | of the present only can have negative effects on the products | it produces." | mellosouls wrote: | It takes longer to sift through the dreck of reddit curated | by popular vote of random people on the internet (who might | be expert in a sub's subject or might just like funny | pictures) to get to stuff worth reading than it does browsing | through a list curated into a canon by civilisation over | millenia. | | Signal, noise, etc. | based2 wrote: | https://www.thehindu.com/books/why-read-the-classics-by-ital... | [deleted] | rossdavidh wrote: | It is a fine thing to revisit the question from time to time, but | I doubt we will ever get a better answer than C.S.Lewis gave: | https://stmonicaacademy.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/C.S.-... | | Which is not, again, a reason not to try. | jwilber wrote: | To be honest, reading that essay reminded me why I (personally) | don't enjoy classics more than modern work: the language of | modern works is already familiar, making for a far more | enjoyable experience. | | I do enjoy some classics (love Dostoyevsky), but in general if | I open a book and find the prose to be more of a hike than a | stream, I don't open it again. | jweir wrote: | Keep in mind many classics are translated and retranslated in | a contemporary tongue. I was reading some Plutarch and found | it incredibly accessible and easy to read - most Latin texts | that I have read are quiet easy. | | Until I started reading them I was expecting something more | like the Bible - so terse it is exhausting. | veddox wrote: | That essay was the first thing I thought of when I read the | title :-) | loosetypes wrote: | > [...] he made it a rule never to touch a book by any author who | had not been dead at least 30 years. | | > "That's the only kind of book I can trust", he said. | | > "It's not that I don't believe in contemporary literature," he | added, "but I don't want to waste valuable time reading any book | that has not had the baptism of time. Life is too short. | | - Haruki Murakami, Norwegian Wood | toomanyrichies wrote: | The same logic is applicable to news headlines. I purposely avoid | consuming major news outlets because their job is to sell my | eyeballs to the highest bidder. If I instead focus on learning | about the most significant events starting at N years in the past | and going backwards, I'm much more likely to be learning about | only those events that history has judged to be historically | significant. | | There's a saying that "You always read about the one plane that | crashes, not the millions that land safely." The job of news | media is to shock, awe, and transfix the public for the benefit | of the shareholders. My bet / hope is that authors of history | books don't operate under the same economic model. | | Jeff Bezos admonishes his employees to focus on the things about | society and human nature which _don't_ change, rather than the | things which _do_ change, if they hope to move the needle at | Amazon. I feel like that advice is broadly applicable to the | public and those who are generally civic-minded, not just those | who want to succeed in business. | karaterobot wrote: | I don't subscribe to the idea that all classics are mandatory. | However, there is a certain amount of homework you would have to | do if you want to understand the culture you live in. The Bible | and Homer, Shakespeare, Milton, Cervantes, Goethe, etc. Stories | that other stories build on and extend, down through history. | Scratch any contemporary book, movie, video game, whatever, and | those sources are right under the surface. They're in the | language you speak, the music you listen to. You are well served | by having certain classics as part of your education, but if you | are not curious about that stuff I am sure you can live your life | without knowing. | einpoklum wrote: | I would say that reading the whole bible to "understand the | culture you live in" is a massive over-investment of time, even | if you're in a country where the culture is Christian or | Jewish. | einpoklum wrote: | There are far too many "classics" for even a person who is | invested in reading them, to read. | | So, the question is moot, unless you contrast it to dogmatically | refraining from reading any classics. | | The real questions are: | | 1. How to decide which classics to choose to read? | | and of course | | 2. What constitutes the classics, or perhaps who do you trust to | list the classics for you? | heavyset_go wrote: | Art makes allusions, and is inspired by, and builds off of, other | work. There's even great work that, when you boil it down, is | done in homage to earlier creations or creators. | | Being familiar with classic literature is one way to appreciate | the rest of culture, as it gives you a reference for everything | that comes after it. | 2bitencryption wrote: | and let's not forget the classic "Why Read the Classics?" | | https://whumspring2010.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/calvino.p... | [deleted] | zemvpferreira wrote: | For a while I tried to do the opposite and only read very | contemporary books (harder than you'd think). I had three | reasons: | | -I felt (still feel) a lot of pity towards new authors. It's hard | enough to break through in any field, imagine having to compete | with millennia worth of people. Man that has to suck and the | easiest way I had to give them a leg up is to give them priority. | | -I'm lazy and hope contemporary authors will digest all of those | classics for me, even if only through the culture, and give me an | easier to assimilate message. There's an ease to reading someone | from your generation that really helps with comprehension. | | -This sentiment is as old as the hills and I'm a contrarian. | Can't deny that particular emotion rules over my decisions now | and again. ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2021-03-06 23:00 UTC)