Ben Domenech discusses the books that “everyone must read”, but very few have actually done more than turn the pages a bit, or perhaps scanned the Wikipedia entry for:
The truth is, there are lots of books no one really expects you to read or finish. War and Peace? The Canterbury Tales? The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire? Announcing that you’ve finished those books might surprise a lot of people and make them think you’re abnormal or anti-social, unless you’re an English or History major who took their reading very, very seriously. Perhaps the shift to ebook format will diminish this reading by osmosis – and book sales, too – since people can afford to be honest about their preference for 50 Shades over The Red and the Black since their booklists are hidden in their Kindles and iPads.
So here’s my attempt to drill this down to a more realistic list: books that are culturally ubiquitous, reading deemed essential, writing everyone has heard of… that you’d be mildly embarrassed to admit you’ve never read.
10. Atlas Shrugged, Ayn Rand: The libertarian moment has prompted a slew of people to lie about reading Ayn Rand, or to deploy the term “Randian” as a synonym for, say, competitive bidding in Medicare reform without even bothering to understand how nonsensical that is.
9. On the Origin of Species, Charles Darwin: Many pro-evolutionists online display no understanding that the pro-evolution scientific community rejects the bulk of Darwin’s initial findings about evolution.
8. Les Miserables, Victor Hugo and A Tale of Two Cities, Charles Dickens: Virtually every bit of literature about the French Revolution could be tied here, though ignorance of it might inspire fun future headlines, such as “De Blasio Brandishes Knitting Needles, Calls For ‘The People’s Guillotine’ To Be Erected In Times Square.”
7. 1984, George Orwell: A great example of a book people think they have read because they have seen a television ad. On Youtube.
6. Democracy in America, Alexis De Tocqueville: Politicians are the worst about this, quoting and misquoting the writings of the Tocqueville without ever bothering to actually read this essential work. But politicians do this a lot – with The Federalist Papers and The Constitution, too.
5. The Wealth of Nations, Adam Smith: Smith’s invisible hand is all that many people seem to know about his work, but his contributions were more sophisticated than that, rejecting a simplistic view of self-interest and greed as the motivating factors in a healthy economy.
4. Moby Dick, Herman Melville: If you haven’t managed this one yet, consider that William F. Buckley, Jr. did not actually read this until he was 50, remarking then to friends: “To think I might have died without having read it.”
3. The Art of War, Sun Tzu: Misunderstood and misapplied by people who’ve never bothered to read it, Sun Tzu’s advice is as much a guide to war as it is to avoiding combat via deception and guile, and to only fight battles one is certain of winning.
2. The Prince, Niccolo Machiavelli: Viewed by people who don’t understand the context as a guide to mendacious political gamesmanship and the use of hypocrisy and cruelty as political tools, Machiavelli’s work is likely a brilliant work of sarcastic trolling which contradicts everything else he wrote in life – which is one reason it was dedicated, sarcastically, to the Medicis who exiled and tortured him.
1. Ulysses, James Joyce: I own this book but have never read it.
Yeah, there are a few books I’m ashamed to admit I’ve never read or, in the wonderful phrase used on the Bujold mailing list, “bounced off”. I’ve read lots of Rand’s non-fiction, but have only ever finished We, the Living in her fiction works. I have read Nineteen Eighty-Four, and own copies of most of the others, but haven’t finished most of them (and haven’t even begun with the Darwin, Dickens, Hugo, or Melville titles).
We The Living is the only work by Rand I couldn’t finish. I found it incredibly dull. I didn’t care if Kira escaped or not. I’ve read Atlas Shrugged more than once. I won’t admit how many times in public. Same with The Fountainhead.
Never read Origin of Species. Didn’t really see the point, but I’ve known biologists who swear that it’s quite accessible to non-specialists.
Les Miserables, Victor Hugo and A Tale of Two Cities, Charles Dickens – I’ve read both once. While Hugo is a brilliant writer he is very, ahem, long. Large swath of Les Mis are dedicated to essays that have almost nothing to do with the plot. The essays are interesting but, again, have nothing to do with the plot. They cut those bits out when making the musical. Difficult to set a dozen pages of analysis on Napoleon’s strategy at Waterloo to music.
1984, George Orwell – Read it twice as well as Animal Farm. I regret I still haven’t read much of his work from the 1930s. Orwell as a writer shines much more brightly in his essays.
Democracy in America, Alexis De Tocqueville – Read it once. I’ve only read portions of The Federalist Papers. I have limits.
The Wealth of Nations, Adam Smith – read it in university. The first three books are agonizing. The last two are actually very interesting and well written, proved you are fascinated by 18th century economic history and politics. Which is about twelve people in the world at last count. I have not read The Theory of Moral Sentiments. It sits on my couch, mocking me ungraciously.
Moby Dick, Herman Melville – Hell no. Even on a desert island I’d be reading the coconuts.
The Art of War, Sun Tzu – It’s on a shelf somewhere. I’ll get to it eventually.
The Prince, Niccolo Machiavelli – Read it. Yes it is brilliant and quite short. You can read it during a long afternoon.
Ulysses, James Joyce – Read a few pages in university. I don’t hate myself enough to finish the damn thing.
The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire – I read an abridged version in high school that was under 500 pages. Gibbon is a superb writer but, again, it is very, very long. Reading time is a scarce resource. There is only so much I want to know, or need to know, about the last few dozen Roman Emperors.
The problem with the “classics” is that just because works were historically influential, doesn’t mean they were well written or remain relevant. I’ve read both the Illiad and the Odyssey and far preferred the latter. There are only so many times I can care about some obscure character getting his head bashed in. Yet you can’t study anything about classical history without running into the fact that the ancients thought the Illiad was the be all and end all.
Comment by Richard Anderson — January 17, 2014 @ 22:03
It sounds like the “asides” in Hugo’s Les Miserables would interest me more than the main story!
Orwell was a truly brilliant essay writer. I’m still working on getting copies of his collected works … there was a new edition published several years back, but I didn’t have the money at the time (and now they’re fetching much higher than original price on eBay). Some of his very early essays are a bit cramped and painful to read, as they were written for a very specific audience: young, earnest socialists chafing at the restrictions of middle class English society. Fortunately, he soon started writing for a wider audience, and the work blossomed as a result.
I tried the first few pages. It gave me a similar sensation to being drunk, without the pleasurable aspects.
Precisely!
Comment by Nicholas — January 19, 2014 @ 12:01