Classics and the Western Canon discussion

Our discussion of T.S. Eliot will be relatively brief for this group, so I've decided to use the Interim Read break to start the process of selecting our summer/winter (depending on which hemisphere you call home) read.

The random number generator has spoken, and is offering us a delightfully diverse assortment of options, including philosophy, politics, history, novels, even epic poetry. I've given first just the list, then have given it again with a squib about each text taken from the Goodreads descriptions in case people aren't familiar with some of the options.

As always, we start with a period of discussion of the options, followed by one or, if needed, two rounds of voting.

Aristotle, Ethics
Byron, Don Juan
Cicero, On Obligations
Fielding, Tom Jones
Goethe, Faust
Herodotus, The Histories
Mann, Buddenbrooks
Mill, On Liberty
Nietzsche, The Birth of Tragedy
Seneca, Letters from a Stoic
Swift, Gulliver’s Travels


Aristotle, Ethics
In the Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle sets out to examine the nature of happiness. He argues that happiness consists in ‘activity of the soul in accordance with virtue’,

Byron, Don Juan
Byron's exuberant masterpiece tells of the adventures of Don Juan, beginning with his illicit love affair at the age of sixteen in his native Spain and his subsequent exile to Italy.

Cicero, On Obligations
Cicero wrote On Obligations (De Officiis) in late 44 BC after the assassination of Julius Caesar to provide principles of behavior for aspiring politicians. It has subsequently played a seminal role in the formation of ethical values in western Christendom. Adopted by the fourth-century Christian humanists, it became transmuted into the moral code of the high Middle Ages.

Fielding, Tom Jones
Henry Fielding's picaresque tale of a young man's search for his place in the world,

Goethe, Faust
Goethe’s Faust reworks the late medieval myth of a brilliant scholar so disillusioned he resolves to make a contract with Mephistopheles.

Herodotus, The Histories
One of the masterpieces of classical literature, the "Histories" describes how a small and quarrelsome band of Greek city states united to repel the might of the Persian empire. But while this epic struggle forms the core of his work, Herodotus' natural curiosity frequently gives rise to colorful digressions

Mann, Buddenbrooks
Buddenbrooks, first published in Germany in 1901, when Mann was only twenty-six, has become a classic of modern literature. It is the story of four generations of a wealthy bourgeois family in northern Germany facing the advent of modernity;

Mill, On Liberty
John Stuart Mill was a prodigious thinker who sharply challenged the beliefs of his age. In On Liberty, one of the sacred texts of liberalism, he argues that any democracy risks becoming a “tyranny of opinion” in which minority views are suppressed if they do not conform to those of the majority.

Nietzsche, The Birth of Tragedy
A compelling argument for the necessity for art in life, Nietzsche's first book is fuelled by his enthusiasms for Greek tragedy, for the philosophy of Schopenhauer and for the music of Wagner, to whom this work was dedicated.

Seneca, Letters from a Stoic
The Stoic philosophy which Seneca professed in his writings, later supported by Marcus Aurelius, provided Rome with a passable bridge to Christianity. Seneca's major contribution to Stoicism was to spiritualize and humanize a system which could appear cold and unrealistic.

Swift, Gulliver’s Travels
Swift's savage satire views mankind in a distorted hall of mirrors as a diminished, magnified and finally bestial species, presenting us with an uncompromising reflection of ourselves.

If Birth of Tragedy is chosen, it would be nice to read The Case of Wagner as well, just to get a complete picture, so to speak, of Nietzsche's view on Wagner.

Interesting, I actually had Herodotus tentatively queued up for my next read. I would definitely join in for that one.

I'm good with any of these. I hope to be able to join in but am uncertain if I will be able to participate fully so will not vote.

Kyle wrote: "Interesting, I actually had Herodotus tentatively queued up for my next read. I would definitely join in for that one."

I think he would a great choice, and certainly a nice change after two moderns (Joyce and Eliot).

Herodotus is a great read, and most people can read and enjoy it on their own without any difficulty. For a group read, however, I'd rather reserve my choice for those books that I can't tackle on my own, or at least not as well as with a group like this.

True confessions: I have never read Nietzsche! This is going to be another difficult decision of the finest kind.

I've only read one and a half books by Nietzsche, so I'm definitely not a scholar. The Birth of Tragedy is one of the first books he ever wrote, so presumably it is a good introduction to his philosophy.

The Birth of Tragedy is interesting in its own way, but it is an early work that Nietzsche himself later criticized:

I find it an impossible book today. I declare that it is badly written, clumsy, embarrassing, with a rage for imagery and confused in its imagery, emotional, here and there sugary to the point of effeminacy, uneven in pace, lacking the will to logical cleanliness...

It is not really representative of the philosophy that he would come to be known for -- his attack on morality and rationalism and the Judeo-Christian tradition, which came a few years later. The Gay Science: with a Prelude in Rhymes and an Appendix of Songs, Thus Spoke Zarathustra or Beyond Good and Evil would provoke a livelier discussion than Birth of Tragedy, IMO.

Thomas wrote: "The Birth of Tragedy is interesting in its own way, but it is an early work that Nietzsche himself later criticized: .."

In the passage you quoted, it sounds to me he was criticizing the style not the substance of his book.

It has been argued that Nietzsche's anti-rationalism can be attributed to his identification with the Greek god Dionysus as opposed to Apollo, the god of suffering versus the god of abstract form. The latter theme is explored at length in The Birth of Tragedy. So I think this book is really the beginning of his philosophy.

Did I pique your interest in the book? :)

Nemo wrote: "In the passage you quoted, it sounds to me he was criticizing the style not the substance of his book.
"

Could be, but I think he's right. Whatever its merits (and obviously it has some) the book is still a mess.

Well, I'm hoping that the translation by the renowned Nietzsche scholar Walter Kaufmann, and Nietzsche fans in this group, could help us appreciate his brilliance in spite of the mess.

Thomas wrote: "Nemo wrote: "In the passage you quoted, it sounds to me he was criticizing the style not the substance of his book."

Could be, but I think he's right. Whatever its merits (and obviously it has some) the book is still a mess...."

Thomas -- what would it be better to read of Nietzsche? I have not ever taken ahold of reading him.

Zippy wrote: "This is going to be another difficult decision of the finest kind."

I love putting people in that situation! If there aren't at least several choices that people have a hard time choosing among, I feel that I've somewhat failed the group.

Patrice wrote: "I thought the Genealogy of Morality was great."

This is a good place to start, I think. Or else Beyond Good and Evil. It's been a long time since I read either one, but both are better written than Birth of Tragedy, and both are more powerful examples of Nietzsche's thought and writing.

Beyond Good and Evil may be more representative of Nietzsche's way of thinking and writing in a more finished form, but it doesn't delve into his idea of art--his interpretation of Greek tragedies and the music of Wagner in particular, which is perhaps the source from which all his other ideas were derived. As one writer would put it, "Talent goes into the first book, and art into the books that follow".

I'd be looking for something somewhat shorter and easier than our recent reads. Aristotle and Mill would interest me. I'd look forward to all the side discussions, background links etc.

Mill's working relationship with his wife, and the subsequent influence on his writing is interesting.

Just a thought.

I've read some of the others on the list, or they are on my personal list for some future date.

Theresa wrote: "I'd be looking for something somewhat shorter and easier than our recent reads. Aristotle and Mill would interest me. I'd look forward to all the side discussions, background links etc. "

Aristotle may look short... but it isn't. Nor is it easy, but it's rich wonderful stuff, if philosophy is your bag. Like all his work it is very compact, so a few pages go a long way.

I am ready to read "Faust" again. I have to admit I was having difficulty getting into it until Audible made available a dramatized version and an unabridged reading. They really opened it up to me.

Laurel wrote: "I am ready to read "Faust" again. I have to admit I was having difficulty getting into it until Audible made available a dramatized version and an unabridged reading. They really opened it up to me."

Does the Audible version include Part 2? For that matter, does our selection?

Nemo wrote: "Does the Audible version include Part 2? For that matter, does our selection? "

Don't know about Audible, but yes, when we read works that have multiple parts, we read the all. As we did with, for example, Don Quixote and Pilgrim's Progress.

Nemo wrote: "Laurel wrote: "I am ready to read "Faust" again. I have to admit I was having difficulty getting into it until Audible made available a dramatized version and an unabridged reading. They really ope..."

When I listened to it, I thought it had both parts, Nemo, but I'm not 100% sure.

Everyman wrote: "yes, when we read works that have multiple parts, we read the all"

That's good and good to know. Thank you.

Laurel, could you post the Audible link please, if it is not too much trouble?

Faust.

This is the dramatization, which is really good for getting into the story:
http://www.audible.com/pd/Classics/Fa...

And this is the unabridged reading:
http://www.audible.com/pd/Classics/Fa...

I'm curious about Don Juan. Despite being Byron I never thought it would appear as a candidate in our polls. Is it lurid or titillating, or a cautionary tale? Frankly, it sounds like it could be a barrel of laughs!

Laurel wrote: "Faust.

This is the dramatization, which is really good for getting into the story:.."

Thank you for the links, Laurel. I'm surprised Audible has only two versions of Faust in English.

Everyman wrote: ". If there aren't at least several choices that people have a hard time choosing among, I feel that I've somewhat failed the group..."

Wait a minute, it is the random number generator that provided the book choices, why should you take the blame (or credit)? :)

Come to think of it, it would be very interesting to have a selection of books made up entirely of moderator recommendations. Is that possible?

I would love to read Faust. That's the one that catches my eye the most. I read The Sorrows of Young Werther for my world literature class this spring, and I am interested in Goethe's other work.

Nemo wrote: "Wait a minute, it is the random number generator that provided the book choices, why should you take the blame (or credit)? :)"

Largely because a) I designed the random number system to make sure that we didn't just read popular nominations but got a good selection of options, and b) I made sure to populate the bookshelf with a wide ranging selection of classics from a number of different sources.

That said, I will confess to a slight amount of manipulation. I do go through the bookshelf from time to time and occasionally delete books that I don't think fit our criteria. These are usually books about classics (we have in the past had several members who put a number of such books on the shelf) or books by non-Western authors. And I confess that I do occasionally leave out a book which the RNS "chooses" which for some reason I don't want to put on the nominations list. In the last set, for example, I dropped "Great Ideas in the Western Literary Canon," and probably should have taken it off the shelf except that some people may find discover it there and find it worth reading on their own, but it isn't really the sort of book we can read for a good discussion.

But mainly, why I think the process works so well to get a great selection is the quality of what's on the bookshelf and the use of the random number generator to take the subjective element mostly out of what we get to vote on.

The poll is now up. It will be open for one week.

Get your votes in!

Remember that the raw number of votes will not necessarily show the final result, since we use weighted voting.

Also remember that as the voting goes on, if your preferred book clearly isn't going to make it into the run-off, you can easily change your vote to another book you would like to read which is more likely to get into the run-off election, assuming we need one.

I wonder who is leading?

I didn't vote on account of having not contributed to the last read I voted for. I am still interested in looking in on whatever read is chosen.

Thanks. I don't think you can see it unless you vote.

I can see the voting page and the winners of the previous polls but not the current status of the current poll - just the voting options.

Also, I can't remember what the page looks like after I've voted, and if I vote I'll be committed to reading if my vote wins.

Patrice wrote: "Click on polls. It's at the top of the page, to the right. Faust is leading."

Is the vote close? I guess it will probably be Faust if not?

Is the vote close? I guess it will probably be Faust if not?"

NO SPOILERS. None. Period.

:-D

whispering: It's such a small group voting that it could be turned with just a couple more votes, but yes, Faust is still winning.

Theresa wrote: "Patrice wrote: "Click on polls. It's at the top of the page, to the right. Faust is leading."

Is the vote close? I guess it will probably be Faust if not?"

Theresa -- select "show results" in lower right corner to see the present status of a poll. Once you have done that, you can also select the number of votes to see who has voted for a particular selection. Or select "total votes" to see a list of who has voted and for what they voted.

You can also delete your vote if you do vote accidentally. I forget exactly how to do that -- someone else refresh my memory and tell Theresa? (Since I usually forget -- it is easy to delete when one remembers how -- I usually move a regretted vote to something that appears unlikely to be chosen.)

Theresa wrote: "Thanks. I don't think you can see it unless you vote."

Yes, you can. Just click on "show results" at the bottom of the poll.

Theresa wrote: "Also, I can't remember what the page looks like after I've voted, and if I vote I'll be committed to reading if my vote wins. "

You can always change your vote if you decide you don't want read the leading book after all.

The book you voted for is marked with an asterisk.

To unvote, click on "change my vote" and then don't select a new choice. I think that does it.

ah yes, I see it now. That stuff seems to come up automatically once you do vote.

It looks like the group has chosen Faust for our third read of 2015.
(Patrice will find out why soon enough. :) )

Nemo wrote: "It looks like the group has chosen Faust for our third read of 2015.
(Patrice will find out why soon enough. :) )"

Well, at least if we don't consider it close enough to need a run-off.

The vote count of the top contenders was:

Faust: Raw 9, weighted 17
Nietzsche: Raw 5, weighted 11
Herodotus: Raw 4, weighted 8

It would take all the Herodotus voters going for Nietzsche to catch up to Faust and I know that's not going to happen because I know at least one Herodotus voter who would go with Faust, so I think Nemo has called it and our next book will be Faust.

And Nemo has taken on the role of persuading Patrice that it's the best choice!

Laurel wrote: And this is the unabridged reading:
http://www.audible.com/pd/Classics/Fa... ."

I was surprised to see that it's under 6 hours long. Surely that's not enough for Parts 1 and 2?

Everyman wrote: "Nemo has taken on the role of persuading Patrice that it's the best choice."

But who will persuade Nemo?

(I have an idea for the Interim Read now.)

It is just Part 1—the Bayard Taylor translation. Kaufman includes only parts of Part 2 in his translation, reasoning that it is difficult to read in German and even more difficult to translate into lucid English: "To let Goethe speak English is one thing; to transpose into English his attempts to imitate Greek poetry in German is another." Walter Arndt, whose translation seems to include everything but the German, is used in my Norton Critical Edition.

Taylor's translation (Part I only) is available at Gutenberg. http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/14591

Laurel,

Do you recommend Walter Arndt's translation for the group read?

I enjoyed Part I of Faust, but no so much to want more of it, and Kaufmann made me reluctant to read Part II.

Ah, I see the voting/poll has closed…my vote was to be Goethe's Faust as well (or Mann's Buddenbrooks)…so my vote would not have changed a thing, it appears!