Strategies for reading the classics?

[ATDrake]

Originally Posted by khalleron

He wore a wig.

Seriously? Wow. Wiki says the series was aired in 1976 and Patrick Stewart was born in 1940. It must be very depressing to go bald in one's mid-30s*, especially when as an actor, part of your living depends on your looks.

* I feel sorrier for Prince William over that than the paparazzi harassment, TBH.

[anamardoll]

Steve Martin went gray at an early age. Seems to have helped their careers more than hurt it, though.

[DMB]

I used to see Patrick Stewart on stage when he was at the Royal Shakespeare in the late 1960s and early 1970s and I think the baldness was starting then.

[crich70]

Originally Posted by DMB

I used to see Patrick Stewart on stage when he was at the Royal Shakespeare in the late 1960s and early 1970s and I think the baldness was starting then.

In an interview Mr. Stewart told how he used to let his hair grow long on one side so he could comb it over to hide his bald spot. One day someone he knew grabbed him from behind while he sat in a chair and the other man's wife cut the long hair off. Then the other man grabbed him by the upper arms and said, "now you show people who you are." After that Mr. Stewart apparently learned to accept himself as himself. He is a good actor.

[ficbot]

I guess that I should have clarified that when I say "restoration" I am referring ton the one course I took, which I suppose is nor fair because I can see that they amalgamated some other stuff in there too :-)

I know the Harvard Claasics are a bit dated. The book list from B&N seems a bit more well-rounded. I just don't want to get into a mindset where I feel paralyzed if I don't have footnotes or if I want to skip out of sequence.

[khalleron]

Patrick Stewart lost his hair all at once when he was 19. The first role he did not wear a wig for was ST:TNG, at the request of the producers. He wore a wig to audition, and they asked him to take it off, and then decided to let Picard be bald.

Probably the best decision they made.

[ardeegee]

Originally Posted by Barty

Kind of boggles my mind that people can NOT like Austen.

I care exactly the same amount as to the marriage choices and social events of the characters in an Austen book as I care about whether or not Rebecca Black chooses to "kick" in the front seat or the back seat, and what she is doing on her Friday. (In other words, I could not possibly care any less, or place any less significance or value on it.)

[khalleron]

Originally Posted by ardeegee

I care exactly the same amount as to the marriage choices and social events of the characters in an Austen book as I care about whether or not Rebecca Black chooses to "kick" in the front seat or the back seat, and what she is doing on her Friday. (In other words, I could not possibly care any less, or place any less significance or value on it.)

If that's all you think Austen is, then you don't know Jane.

[anamardoll]

No author is sacrosanct. No book is beloved by every person on earth. No book is even beloved by every right-thinking person on earth. There is not one book on this earth that is free from flaws, above criticism, or can be agreed upon as being meaningful, wise, clever, or entertaining by everyone on earth.

Statements such as "I can't believe there are people who don't like X" are meaningless and say more about the speaker than the listener.

Let's leave it at that.

Also, Darcy is a prick and Lizzie is tiresome. *ducks*

[Harmon]

Originally Posted by ardeegee

Writing evolves over time, just like any other technology created by humans. The Model T Ford is a historically important car-- but that doesn't mean that some modern cars aren't an improvement in almost every way. For instance, Dickens is fine, Trollope, I don't believe I've ever heard of. But Austen? I'd rather spend my time reading a telephone directory.

"Sir! A man who cannot read Jane Austen is tired of life!"

(What Dr. Johnson would have said if he hadn't died too soon to read Austen.)

[ATDrake]

Originally Posted by Harmon

"Sir! A man who cannot read Jane Austen is tired of life!"

(What Dr. Johnson would have said if he hadn't died too soon to read Austen.)

"Ursa Minor Beta is, some say, one of the most appalling places in the known Universe.

Although it is excruciatingly rich, horrifyingly sunny and more full of wonderfully exciting people than a pomegranate is of pips, it can hardly be insignificant that when a recent edition of Playbeing Magazine headlined an article with the words, 'When you are tired of Ursa Minor Beta you are tired of life', the suicide rate there quadrupled overnight."

(What Douglas Adams wrote in one of the Hitchhiker's Guide books.)

Sorry, couldn't resist. And why do we not have a "Don't Panic" smiley? It seems is the closest I can get.

[anamardoll]

You know what this thread needs? A tie-in poll. *dashes off*

https://www.mobileread.com/forums/sho...d.php?t=138364

[Harmon]

Okay, type first, read the thread later. But here's my take:

1. If you have reached the point where you think you need to read the classics, you have passed the point where you have time to read the classics. It follows that you can only read some of the classics. Therefore, do not read what you find you don't like.

2. The purpose of reading the classics is to be entertained and/or instructed. The classics worth reading for those purposes cluster in the histories, the novels, and the biographies. (All of these being, of course, degrees of narrative fiction.) Review point 1.

3. If, after reading the first chapter of any classic, you find that you do not care to read the second chapter, put it down and choose another book. Review point 1.

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.

5. There are three general areas of novels you should read in: English, Russian and French. It is important to find a translation you like in the latter two. Read the English for entertainment, the Russians for instruction, and the French for Flaubert and Proust, even though you probably won't finish Proust. At this point I throw in Montaigne, who doesn't fit anywhere else.

6. Biographies: Boswell's Life of Johnson, and Shakespeare's tragedies. 'Nuf said.

7. The Bible, in that it contains history, novels and biography. Consider it as a kind of literary and moral reference source for the English and the Russians. For the French, it's politics, and is therefore of little consequence.

8. Always check Project Gutenberg and your friendly neighborhood Mobileread for free eClassics.

9. Review point 1.

[Harmon]

Originally Posted by ATDrake

"Ursa Minor Beta is, some say, one of the most appalling places in the known Universe.

Although it is excruciatingly rich, horrifyingly sunny and more full of wonderfully exciting people than a pomegranate is of pips, it can hardly be insignificant that when a recent edition of Playbeing Magazine headlined an article with the words, 'When you are tired of Ursa Minor Beta you are tired of life', the suicide rate there quadrupled overnight."

(What Douglas Adams wrote in one of the Hitchhiker's Guide books.)

Sorry, couldn't resist. And why do we not have a "Don't Panic" smiley? It seems is the closest I can get.

For those who don't get it, Johnson was often referred to as Ursa Major.

Even more obscurely, Jane Austen is regarded by some or maybe more as a moralist second only to Johnson, which is what makes this quote appropriate.

But I confess that I don't get the Beta, unless (a) we shoehorn someone in between Johnson & Austen (Eliot, perhaps?) or (b) there's nothing to get.

[crich70]

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