Reading classic literature AFTER college/high school...

[Leaping Larry Jojo]

It's interesting how much more enjoyable many of the "compulsory" readings you had to do in your school years can be if you read them AFTER you're finished school. I'm reading various translations of The Odyssey, the Aeneid and Inferno right now, and I'll be picking up Milton's Paradise Lost soon.

It's a strange thing that when I was forced to read these classics during high school, I had a tougher time absorbing all the details, unhelped by the added pressure of having to write papers on them. Now that I'm reading them strictly on my own time, I'm memorizing a lot of these little events and quotes easier than I would have been able to as a teenager. What was "a struggle" before is now "enjoyable."

Now, for the books mentioned, aside from The Odyssey, I don't believe I had studied the other 3 during my school years. What I do know is that I probably wouldn't have touched them with a 20 foot pole back then.

I think sometimes, learning also has a lot to do with timing. Sometimes you're just "not ready" to delve into something but find that later you can fully devour something that you were unable to do before. In a way, schooling MUST give a person the tools to learn, but actual learning, I've discovered, is more or less an individual pursuit rather than a compulsory one. Or rather, should be.

Does anyone else feel this way?

[EinBebop]

I reached a conclusion a few years ago that many of the books I was reading was just throwaway garbage, and that I wanted to read more books that actually meant something, and might make me a little smarter/knowledgable. I kinda go through phases in what I like to read, though. Lately I've been going through a retro-phase, re-reading some of the garbage I liked in high school.

To anyone wanting to delve more into classics, you might want to pick up The Lifetime Reading Plan (4th edition) for suggestions on directions to go. I'd probably need two or three lifetimes to get through the list in there. The third edition of this list (4th was significantly changed to add more non-western civilization books) and several others are reprinted at The Masterworks of Civilization web page, but I liked reading the little discourses in LRP telling me why they made each suggestion.

[Space Chief]

Reading classic books after high school? I thought that was illegal!

By the way, this is my AMAZING 300TH POST, so I finally get to post this:


What does that have to do with anything?
Nothing.
But I've scarred you for life.

[Gatomon41]

I like reading many of the Great Western Works, like Homer's works, Augustine's Confessions, Chaucer's Canterberry Tales, Conperincus, Galielo, and even Kepler's findings, even Herodotus and Taticus' Histories.

These works help found Literature today, and many works are inspired by these works. So I read them, because they're still neat.

[Humble]

Have to agree with you Leaping Larry Jojo. Reading books on my own time is a hell of alot better then when its mandatory. It'll take me some time before I can read and actually enjoy the works of Shakespeare.

-Humble

[I.R Joey]

I came to the same conclusion as you Jojo.

Read the Screwtape letters and Mere Christianity (still have to finish that actually) for my own leisure after High school and it was awesome. I felt like I was reading them for the first time.

[Artimus Gigan]

I read on a regular baisis, however for what classifies a book as classic literature seems to be a bit foggy. Because there are three books I would love to burn from humanity's existance, 1984, Animal Farm, and Catcher in The Rye.

1984 especialy because is literaly outdated and implausable especialy in Today's society with the vast ammounts of free information at anyone's disposal.

[Gatomon41]

I read on a regular baisis, however for what classifies a book as classic literature seems to be a bit foggy. Because there are three books I would love to burn from humanity's existance, 1984, Animal Farm, and Catcher in The Rye.

1984 especialy because is literaly outdated and implausable especialy in Today's society with the vast ammounts of free information at anyone's disposal.

1984 and Animal Farm is suppose to be an allegory. Sure, it's might not really happen, but the idea is not try to depict what is possible, but show an allegory how totalarian societies can operate (if somewhat exagerated).

[Artimus Gigan]

1984 and Animal Farm is suppose to be an allegory. Sure, it's might not really happen, but the idea is not try to depict what is possible, but show an allegory how totalarian societies can operate (if somewhat exagerated).

But if you compare it to what they think and how things really work, it's like saying that Betamax will rule the future of media formats when actually it's DVD.

[Master Moron]

I read on a regular baisis, however for what classifies a book as classic literature seems to be a bit foggy. Because there are three books I would love to burn from humanity's existance, 1984, Animal Farm, and Catcher in The Rye.

Really? I loved Animal Farm and Catcher in the Rye. Never read 1984, though.

I actually just read Catcher in the Rye this past summer. I have to say, I really related to the main character a lot. Which is rather surprising since he's like in high school and I'm like a law student. I wonder if that makes me immature?

Anyway, as long as we're denouncing classic works of literature, am I the only one who hates the Odyssey? I mean, I know when the story was originally told a hero was thought of as someone who mercilessly kills people, but considering our standards as a society have changed, I don't see why we still hold the Odyssey in such high regard. I mean, if someone behaved as Odysseus did in our modern society he would be locked up.

[Gatomon41]

But if you compare it to what they think and how things really work, it's like saying that Betamax will rule the future of media formats when actually it's DVD.

How things really work does not matter in Science Fiction Poltical Allegory, just as long as the point is made. Sure the science is outdated and society change, but that's not the point. Orwell never intend the book to actually depict something real. Orwell wanted to show a really Totalartian society in which a government really did control everyone's life and thoughts.

[Delthayre]

I loved 1984,but Animal Farm didn't interest me as much for some reason. While the central premise of 1984 has been to a considerable degree superceded by the progress of reality, I don't think that it is wholly obsolete, and even if it were, I find enough merit in the quality of the writing to make it worthwhile.

If there's a book that's worth denouncing, it's Gustav Flaubert's dreadful and stultifying Madame Bovary. I too have found that reading books forced upon me in school of my own volition improves the experience greatly, but nothing could save that tedious novel.

In truth, I have yet to find anything I consider absolutely necessary in reading classical literature. Unless you find that you really enjoy it, I see no reason for the erection of intellectual pretense even for the sake of appearances. Awkwardly enough, however, I find that I actually do enjoy those musty, highly-held books. Thucydides' A History of the Peloponnesian War is one of my favorite books, after all.

Compulsory reading his the unfortunate effect of taking most of the initiative from the reader, it being instead held like a marionette string by the teacher. In essence, it makes reading a book something to be done and finished for the sole reason of appeasing another, rather than achieving the carrying through of something taken upon oneself. And excess of limitations and burdens on reading a book ruins the flavor of it. I adored MacBeth, which I read in 11th grade with rather few excess concerns besides the book itself, but I was so beset with nonsense a year later while reading Hamlet under the command of a student teacher that I found reading that one of the most unpleasant experiences of my time in high school.

[Mynd Hed]

Anyway, as long as we're denouncing classic works of literature, am I the only one who hates the Odyssey? I mean, I know when the story was originally told a hero was thought of as someone who mercilessly kills people, but considering our standards as a society have changed, I don't see why we still hold the Odyssey in such high regard. I mean, if someone behaved as Odysseus did in our modern society he would be locked up.

Well, duh-- at a certain point in the life of every piece of classic literature, the purpose for reading it shifts from being to fully buy into its themes and appreciate it for its own sake, and becomes to understand the impact it's had on our culture and to reflect on the differences between our expectations and the expectations of the piece's original audience, and what those differences say about the course our culture has taken in the corresponding span of time.
I don't think anyone in the past 100 years or so (to make a conservative estimate) has ADMIRED Odysseus, but that doesn't make the Odyssey any less worth reading. It just means that properly appreciating it requires a little more critical distance between the reader and the protagonist.

[Leaping Larry Jojo]

Anyway, as long as we're denouncing classic works of literature, am I the only one who hates the Odyssey? I mean, I know when the story was originally told a hero was thought of as someone who mercilessly kills people, but considering our standards as a society have changed, I don't see why we still hold the Odyssey in such high regard. I mean, if someone behaved as Odysseus did in our modern society he would be locked up.

Hmmm, I'm not sure where you're coming from here, at least strictly on MOST of his actions in the Odyssey. I wouldn't call him a "hero" but then, I've rarely heard people call him that today. More of a "survivor". Odysseus is no saint by any means, but he still usually tries a diplomatic approach before using violence. He's by no means an out of control animal. On the contrary, he's very well spoken and often tries to talk his way out of most problems. Even when he first approached the cyclops, he tried to give him a chance first. It was only after the cyclops ate his men that he decided to injure the cyclops. As far as characters go, he's probably on a more sensible and moral plain than most Greek gods and heroes. I mean, Zeus ate his wife for cryin' out loud!

Now, I grant you that he's a little more testy when he gets home, but it's not like those moochers in his house didn't get fair warning to, like, get off his property. Still, he's pretty ruthless in this episode, I definitely grant you this.

[Ed Liu]

Howdy,

However, I'm not AS familiar with his exploits in the Iliad, but as I understand it, he never wanted to go to war in the first place (he even tried acting like a madman to fool the recruiters, but they saw thought his ruse). However, since his reputation is that of a war hero who has downed hundreds of men and sacked cities, I assume this is what you are referring to (and if so, that concerns him more in the Iliad than in the Odyssey).

That's all correct, except that none of that stuff about Odysseus appears in The Iliad. I'm not entirely sure (been a while since I read it), but the major players in The Iliad are Hector and Priam on the Trojan side and Menelaus and Achilles on the Greek side. Odysseus is there, but I don't think he gets a whole lot to do.

Most of the heroes who fought in the Trojan War didn't want to go, since they viewed it mostly as Menelaus' greed and inability to keep his own house in order. Achilles tried dressing up like a woman, for instance. Odysseus was the first one to get recruited/drafted, and was then instrumental in busting up the others' ruses (to uncover Achilles, he left out a big pile of stuff for the women and then grabbed the only one who was checking out swords and spears rather than the silks and scarves).

In addition to what Leaping Larry Jojo pointed out, part of the enduring appeal of Odysseus also hinges exactly on him not being a negative role model. His greatest crime is hubris, taunting the cyclops after getting away free and clear. That (and a few other instances of his own arrogance) adds a good 8-9 years to his journey home, and it's a lesson that wasn't lost on Greek audiences of the day and is one that shouldn't be lost on modern audiences now.

Plus, the Odyssey has that awesome scene where faithful Argus, Odysseus' dog, is waiting by the door for his master. It is revealed that Argus has been waiting there since Odysseus left until he was too old to get up any more. He's the only one to recognize Odysseus when he shows up and manages a brief tail wag and a lick or two before expiring of extreme old age. Homer was clearly a dog person .

In regards to the original question, I had a pretty oddball reading curriculum, which managed to hold my interest pretty solidly throughout high school. Herman Melville is the only author I can think of that I hated in high school and could only appreciate later in life. Then again, I never read most of the usual high school fare, like the usual Dickens stuff or The Scarlet Letter, and still haven't read The Catcher in the Rye. I hated The Scarlet Letter when I finally did get around to reading it and probably would have hated it even more back then, so I suspect I just got stuff I liked better in high school.

-- Ed/Ace

[Zubby]

Reading classic books after high school? I thought that was illegal!

By the way, this is my AMAZING 300TH POST, so I finally get to post this:


What does that have to do with anything?
Nothing.
But I've scarred you for life.

Is this a real album, and WHERE CAN I GET A COPY?????
I'm totally serious-I'd love to hear this!

[Space Chief]

Is this a real album, and WHERE CAN I GET A COPY?????
I'm totally serious-I'd love to hear this!

Yes, this is a real album, a ventriloquisim[!] album no less. Unfortunately, I have no clue as to where to get this, but I'd check eBay.
Here's the inside sleeve, for those who are interested:


In the immortal words of a member of another forum where I posted this:

After looking at the cover and seeing the title, do I get the image of that dummy whispering in Geraldine's ear and saying things like "Trees talk Geraldine. They know you've been naughty. You're going to Hell."

[Leaping Larry Jojo]

Howdy,


That's all correct, except that none of that stuff about Odysseus appears in The Iliad. I'm not entirely sure (been a while since I read it), but the major players in The Iliad are Hector and Priam on the Trojan side and Menelaus and Achilles on the Greek side. Odysseus is there, but I don't think he gets a whole lot to do.

Yeah, I'd have to check it out for myself to be sure.

At any rate, as you can see from my edited post, I think what MM is actually referring to is when Odysseus shows no mercy to the servants in the house who betrayed him. And I can't entirely disagree about him being pretty ruthless there. It took me a while to actually pin it down, but this is what MM is saying about his mercilessness.

At any rate, you made a good point also about Odysseus' not being able to keep his yapper shut after he escaped the Cyclops.

Still, again I don't consider him a hero so much as some guy who wants to get home and kick the moochers out of his house. A common problem I'm sure most people can relate to even in today's era.

The Odyssey is FAR from the only text, though, that may not agree with modern sensibilities as MM described. Look at the Bible. Some of God's actions, especially in the Old Testament, can be perceived as pretty questionable in today's era.

Oh, did anyone ever study James Joyce in school? Not sure I can ever get into those books. I did kind of like "Portrait of an Artist..." but after reading a few lines in "Ulysses," my head blew up.

[Master Moron]

Well, duh-- at a certain point in the life of every piece of classic literature, the purpose for reading it shifts from being to fully buy into its themes and appreciate it for its own sake, and becomes to understand the impact it's had on our culture and to reflect on the differences between our expectations and the expectations of the piece's original audience, and what those differences say about the course our culture has taken in the corresponding span of time.
I don't think anyone in the past 100 years or so (to make a conservative estimate) has ADMIRED Odysseus, but that doesn't make the Odyssey any less worth reading. It just means that properly appreciating it requires a little more critical distance between the reader and the protagonist.

I don't think that's true. I've talked to several people who DO admire Odysseus. When we read The Odyssey in high school we had lengthy discussions in which many people defended Odysseus's actions.

Hmmm, I'm not sure where you're coming from here, at least strictly on MOST of his actions in the Odyssey. I wouldn't call him a "hero" but then, I've rarely heard people call him that today. More of a "survivor". Odysseus is no saint by any means, but he still usually tries a diplomatic approach before using violence. He's by no means an out of control animal. On the contrary, he's very well spoken and often tries to talk his way out of most problems. Even when he first approached the cyclops, he tried to give him a chance first. It was only after the cyclops ate his men that he decided to injure the cyclops. As far as characters go, he's probably on a more sensible and moral plain than most Greek gods and heroes. I mean, Zeus ate his wife for cryin' out loud!

Well, maybe Odysseus would not be considered a hero today, but back when the Odyssey was first told he was considered a hero. Basically, the definition of a hero has changed a great deal. When I studied The Odyssey in high school I believe we were actually studying different heroes and we determined that what is considered a hero depends on the values and culture of society at the time. A hero back then was considered someone who mercilessly slaughtered their enemies, because thats the type of person that was looked up to at the time.

Now, I grant you that he's a little more testy when he gets home, but it's not like those moochers in his house didn't get fair warning to, like, get off his property. Still, he's pretty ruthless in this episode, I definitely grant you this.

Fair warning? He disguised himself when he got there and then slaughtered them when he got his chance. One of the suitors even knelt down and begged for his life before Odysseus cut off his head. I don't recall him giving any fair warning before he started attacking the suitors.

I never recall Odysseus' wife and son asking the suitors to leave. I remember in class we discussed that while Odysseus' wife didn't want the suitors it would not have been considered polite to ask them to leave. I guess because she's a woman and women did not have power in society back then it was not considered her place to ask them to leave.

And even if Odysseus was justified in killing the suitors, hanging his servants while they were crying for their lives was absolutely excessive. Their only crime was sleeping with the suitors. I mean, yeah, they were sleeping with the enemy, but its not like women really had that much power back then. I mean, its not like they had the power to kick the suitors out of the house. I'm having trouble putting this into words. But, basically, I don't see what his servants did wrong. They slept with the suitors, so what? Its not like they actually betrayed Odysseus. I mean, they thought he was dead. They probably would have gone back to serving him if he let them. I mean, maybe you could argue that they betrayed Odysseus' wife by sleeping with the suitors, but women in society at the time didn't have any power. They really didn't have any responsibility to serve her. The suitors were the only men in the house besides Odysseus' son, so they kind of had to serve them.

You know, I guess I just have a really hard time putting my thoughts into words because I can't really identify with the situation at all. I mean, its hard to equate it with anything in modern times. I mean, I guess it would be like a maid sleeping with a wife's boyfriend. I can't possibly see anything wrong with a maid sleeping with a wife's boyfriend. I mean, it seems so abstract to even think about something like that. I mean, if the husband came home and hung the maid, not only would it be excessive, but I can't even figure out why he would necessarily have a grudge against the maid.

I do recall one of Odysseus' servants being rude to him when he arrived home, but at that time he was disguised, so I'm not sure why he got so pissed off about that.

Oh, did anyone ever study James Joyce in school? Not sure I can ever get into those books. I did kind of like "Portrait of an Artist..." but after reading a few lines in "Ulysses," my head blew up.

Kind of sort of. I did a book report once and I chose to do it on Ulysses. I read a coupel hundred pages of it. I only really had a vague idea what was going on, but I wanted to stick with it. Since the book was REALLY long I asked for an extension, and I discussed it with my teacher and he said that since I really wasn't getting anything out of it, I should just read something else. I really didn't like this idea, as I wanted to stick with it, since I wasn't given an extension, I just read the Cliff's Notes for Catcher in the Rye and wrote my report on that. Which is a shame, since as I just found out last summer, Catcher in the Rye is a really great book, and I bet I would have gotten a lot out of it if I read it in high school. I never finished Ulysses though.

[Gatomon41]

Fair warning? He disguised himself when he got there and then slaughtered them when he got his chance. One of the suitors even knelt down and begged for his life before Odysseus cut off his head. I don't recall him giving any fair warning before he started attacking the suitors.

Hey, Odysseus spend 20 years trying to get home, finds his home a mess, and has a bunch of suitors ruining his home. I be a little angry myself.

To be fair, Greeks had different vaules than today's Western Society. Mercy wasn't exactly a defining quality of a hero in literature at the time I suppose.

And even if Odysseus was justified in killing the suitors, hanging his servants while they were crying for their lives was absolutely excessive. Their only crime was sleeping with the suitors. I mean, yeah, they were sleeping with the enemy, but its not like women really had that much power back then. I mean, its not like they had the power to kick the suitors out of the house. I'm having trouble putting this into words. But, basically, I don't see what his servants did wrong. They slept with the suitors, so what? Its not like they actually betrayed Odysseus. I mean, they thought he was dead. They probably would have gone back to serving him if he let them. I mean, maybe you could argue that they betrayed Odysseus' wife by sleeping with the suitors, but women in society at the time didn't have any power. They really didn't have any responsibility to serve her. The suitors were the only men in the house besides Odysseus' son, so they kind of had to serve them.

Agian, Greek values are different than Modern Western values. Perhaps it was honor reasons (serant are suppose to be loyal to their masters) or maybe out of revenge or some greek Literary convention of the time. I have to look it over myself.