Strategies for reading the classics?

[ardeegee]

Originally Posted by crich70

"A classic is something everybody wants to have read, but no one wants to read." --Mark Twain

Heck, I didn't even know about the Twain quote when I said something similar earlier in the thread*, it is just something I have observed. When I see mention of some classic in a book I'm reading, I think to myself that I need to get around to reading that-- but I never do. I had that happen often recently while reading Among Others, which barely goes a page without mentioning some classic SF or F novel, a huge percentage of which I'd never read. (Of course, "classic" doesn't have to go back quite as far in time with those generes.)

(*I hadn't read these Twain quotes, either )

[Harmon]

Originally Posted by ardeegee

Trollope, I don't believe I've ever heard of. But Austen? I'd rather spend my time reading a telephone directory.

For Trollope, try The Way We Live Now. Talk about the relevance of a classic to modern times!

[anamardoll]

4. There are two general areas of history you should read in: the Greeks, and Shakespeare. Everything that has ever happened, happened to the Greeks. All the rest is commentary. Remember, Homer and the related Greek plays are history, even if they didn't happen. As for Shakespeare, you must read his histories because he wrote them.

Eh, I disagree. There ARE some good Greek works out there that deal with womens' issues and minorities and slavery and so forth, but I wouldn't call Greek literature the absolute sum of human experience.

I recognize that you were being tongue-in-cheek and I am being pedantic, though.

[khalleron]

May I enquire why someone who holds the classics in disdain is commenting on a thread on which classics to read?

It would be like me giving tips on football or military strategy.

[ardeegee]

Originally Posted by khalleron

May I enquire why someone who holds the classics in disdain is commenting on a thread on which classics to read?

Because the title of the thread isn't "Only entirely positive, glowing assessments of any and all books that are old?"

[anamardoll]

Originally Posted by khalleron

May I enquire why someone who holds the classics in disdain is commenting on a thread on which classics to read?

It would be like me giving tips on football or military strategy.

Pretty sure the difference of opinion livens things up.

You wouldn't throw Mark Twain out of the thread, now would you??

[Harmon]

Originally Posted by anamardoll

Eh, I disagree. There ARE some good Greek works out there that deal with womens' issues and minorities and slavery and so forth, but I wouldn't call Greek literature the absolute sum of human experience.

I recognize that you were being tongue-in-cheek and I am being pedantic, though.

(Truth in jest, & all that.)

The sum of human experience, no, but Greek literature is foundational for Western thought, with the exception of God, which was covered by the Hebrews.

So my point is that unless you start with the Greeks, you will have no context for what you read in the Classics. But I should have included the Bible. I will go back & amend my submission on that point.

[Harmon]

Originally Posted by anamardoll

Pretty sure the difference of opinion livens things up.

You wouldn't throw Mark Twain out of the thread, now would you??

Which is ironic, given his quote.

[anamardoll]

Originally Posted by Harmon

(Truth in jest, & all that.)

The sum of human experience, no, but Greek literature is foundational for Western thought, with the exception of God, which was covered by the Hebrews.

So my point is that unless you start with the Greeks, you will have no context for what you read in the Classics. But I should have included the Bible. I will go back & amend my submission on that point.

Sure, agreed. But -- as you pointed out -- it's very Western thought. And most of it is fairly well directed at the people on top of the pile, as it were.

If the point of reading "classics" is to broaden one's horizons, seems like it would be better reading from the POV of the disadvantaged in societies...

[ardeegee]

Originally Posted by Harmon

For Trollope, try The Way We Live Now. Talk about the relevance of a classic to modern times!

Anyone got an omnibus Epub of all his works?

[Harmon]

Originally Posted by anamardoll

Sure, agreed. But -- as you pointed out -- it's very Western thought. And most of it is fairly well directed at the people on top of the pile, as it were.

If the point of reading "classics" is to broaden one's horizons, seems like it would be better reading from the POV of the disadvantaged in societies...

I don't see the point of reading the classics as being broadening one's horizons. I see it as a workout for the mind. Sure, reading the Classics will increase your knowledge, but that's a byproduct. The point is to increase your understanding.

Nor do I agree that the Classics are directed at the people on the top of the pile. They are directed at the people who think. The pile is not static, at least in the West. And people at the top and bottom of the economic pile at any one time are not necessarily the people at the top or bottom of the intellectual pile.

[Harmon]

Originally Posted by ardeegee

Anyone got an omnibus Epub of all his works?

It would take an omnitruck.

[anamardoll]

Originally Posted by Harmon

I don't see the point of reading the classics as being broadening one's horizons. I see it as a workout for the mind. Sure, reading the Classics will increase your knowledge, but that's a byproduct. The point is to increase your understanding.

Nor do I agree that the Classics are directed at the people on the top of the pile. They are directed at the people who think. The pile is not static, at least in the West. And people at the top and bottom of the economic pile at any one time are not necessarily the people at the top or bottom of the intellectual pile.

Well, I guess we should ask the OP why HE wants to read the classics. I was approaching it from a "broaden my horizons" aspect, but you're right that there are other reasons to read classics.

But I do think the Greek classics are largely written by the top 'o the pile of that society, for better or worse. Alas, the Greek slaves for the most part weren't able to record their thoughts on a medium that has survived to reach us.

Even things like The Illiad and The Odyssey is written from the POV of the god-children and heroes and generals. Not so much from the POV of the cannon-fodders.

[anamardoll]

Originally Posted by Harmon

I don't see the point of reading the classics as being broadening one's horizons. I see it as a workout for the mind. Sure, reading the Classics will increase your knowledge, but that's a byproduct. The point is to increase your understanding.

Nor do I agree that the Classics are directed at the people on the top of the pile. They are directed at the people who think. The pile is not static, at least in the West. And people at the top and bottom of the economic pile at any one time are not necessarily the people at the top or bottom of the intellectual pile.

Well, I guess we should ask the OP why HE wants to read the classics. I was approaching it from a "broaden my horizons" aspect, but you're right that there are other reasons to read classics.

But I do think the Greek classics are largely written by the top 'o the pile of that society, for better or worse. Alas, the Greek slaves for the most part weren't able to record their thoughts on a medium that has survived to reach us.

Even things like The Illiad and The Odyssey is written from the POV of the god-children and heroes and generals. Not so much from the POV of the cannon-fodders. Or, for that matter, from the POV of the women other than a handful of queens and princesses.

[Harmon]

Originally Posted by anamardoll

Even things like The Illiad and The Odyssey is written from the POV of the god-children and heroes and generals. Not so much from the POV of the cannon-fodders.

True, not too many Aesops around...