Classics worth reading and those not worth the time - (Popular but not classics books are okay to include too, forgot about them)

[King Metalia]

The Divine Comedy, on the other hand, is the exact opposite of that. It's basically self insert Bible fanfiction where all the author's enemies inexplicably end up in hell.

I've often wondered if something similar could be said of Paradise Lost. Only swap out the authors self insert with John Milton lusting for Satan senpai.

 

[Hazel Motes]

I've often wondered if something similar could be said of Paradise Lost. Only swap out the authors self insert with John Milton lusting for Satan senpai.

Milton's issue is that he is a neo-Platonist. He does not really understand Genesis or traditional theology. His Eden is what Plato might have hypothised, where the whole world was of perfect forms. He believes himself a Christian but he is really a pagan in practise and in thinking. He is too much of an academic, stuck in the intellectual skies, to understand the emotional investment of religious belief. George Gissing, another writer kicked out of university- Oxford, not Cambridge- had a similar attitude, though he was a struggling stoic.

It is a great poem, if not the greatest; the only real and notable Epic poem in English (Spenser's Queen does not count, being unfinished). Milton has an eye, even when his sight was gone, that is rarely matched. All major poetry, and this includes American, responds to it in some way. The Founding Fathers were genuinely influenced by Milton's essays and poems.

Darwin, on his voyage of the Beagle, read Paradise Lost. That was the only theology he ever knew beyond Pascal. When near his death, Darwin attempted to read it again. He did not understand how he liked it so much. One can make the argument that this grand poem, little read today, has far more influence on the public perception of the Genesis narrative and the Garden of Eden than tha actual Bible story and what The Church Fathers spoke and wrote on it.

 

[Castoreum]

I finished Goethe's Faust recently (Kline's English translation). I have some criticisms, but I liked it regardless. I'd recommend it to people who have experience in theater or have consumed other "Faustian" tales, obviously.

The demon Mephistopheles was definitely the highlight. I hated it whenever he disappeared. Faust is a boring character without him who by the end of the story gets away with everything and goes to heaven despite making a pact with the devil. Despite that, there is a lot of great imagery with references to Shakespeare, mythology, etc. that I really enjoyed. The cultural commentary is still quite relevant in some instances, too. Clearly, Mephistopheles has had a grand influence on pop culture representations of the devil: the cape, the cowl, his wacky demeanor, etc.

Now, I have to find the other versions of Faust. I was under the impression that Goethe's was the only one and had no idea it was actually based on even older Germanic legends until digging a bit deeper.

 

[Hazel Motes]

I finished Goethe's Faust recently (Kline's English translation). I have some criticisms, but I liked it regardless. I'd recommend it to people who have experience in theater or have consumed other "Faustian" tales, obviously.

The demon Mephistopheles was definitely the highlight. I hated it whenever he disappeared. Faust is a boring character without him who by the end of the story gets away with everything and goes to heaven despite making a pact with the devil. Despite that, there is a lot of great imagery with references to Shakespeare, mythology, etc. that I really enjoyed. The cultural commentary is still quite relevant in some instances, too. Clearly, Mephistopheles has had a grand influence on pop culture representations of the devil: the cape, the cowl, his whacky demeanor, etc.

Now, I have to find the other versions of Faust. I was under the impression that Goethe's was the only one and had no idea it was actually based on even older Germanic legends until digging a bit deeper.

Out of interest, have you read Christoher Marlowe's Faust? I liked Goethe's work (part one more so) but it lacks the power Marlowe's cynical and darkly funny tragedy has. In England, it is the more popular work. Schools often teach Faust when they are tired of Shakespeare. And he is usually a better taught subject than Shakespeare for his work is based on London dialect that is more direct than Shakespeare's most famous and wordy plays that are used in lessons (Romeo and Juliet an obvious example). Students are quicker to understand the humour and the deliberate absurdity.

Marlowe is great: a spy, a drunk, and a patriot who was assassinated in a pub with a knife stuck in his eye. His tragedies tend to be about how shitty those who chase power are, which a smart spy may be quick to realise. One of his tragedies, much to the disappointment of the modern theatre fags who perform his work, involves a character burning a Koran on stage.

If you do read it, please let me know what you think.

Edit: I also read Mann's Faustus and felt the Mephistopheles section was the best part about it.

And the famous section from Marlowe:

Why this is hell, nor am I out of it.
Think’st thou that I, who saw the face of God,
And tasted the eternal joys of heaven,
Am not tormented with ten thousand hells
In being deprived of everlasting bliss?
O Faustus, leave these frivolous demands,
Which strike a terror to my fainting soul.

 

[Castoreum]

When I get interested in a subject, I experience an intense fixation on it. I definitely plan on reading everything Faust-related I can get my hands on when I have some freetime! Thanks for the recommendations.

 

[Jarolleon]

Milton's issue is that he is a neo-Platonist. He does not really understand Genesis or traditional theology. His Eden is what Plato might have hypothised, where the whole world was of perfect forms. He believes himself a Christian but he is really a pagan in practise and in thinking. He is too much of an academic, stuck in the intellectual skies, to understand the emotional investment of religious belief. George Gissing, another writer kicked out of university- Oxford, not Cambridge- had a similar attitude, though he was a struggling stoic.

It is a great poem, if not the greatest; the only real and notable Epic poem in English (Spenser's Queen does not count, being unfinished). Milton has an eye, even when his sight was gone, that is rarely matched. All major poetry, and this includes American, responds to it in some way. The Founding Fathers were genuinely influenced by Milton's essays and poems.

Darwin, on his voyage of the Beagle, read Paradise Lost. That was the only theology he ever knew beyond Pascal. When near his death, Darwin attempted to read it again. He did not understand how he liked it so much. One can make the argument that this grand poem, little read today, has far more influence on the public perception of the Genesis narrative and the Garden of Eden than tha actual Bible story and what The Church Fathers spoke and wrote on it.

Another example of how widely read it once was, H.P. Lovecraft cribbed Dagon from it and that scene with "Chaos and Old Night" likely inspired the cosmic horror genre.

 

[CowPox]

I just finished "Confederacy of Dunces" it had alot of hype around it and now having read it i found it a bit underwhelming. It has its moments and the best part of the book for me is the Ignatius character, kinda a cross between the Dude from the Big Lebowski and Niles Crane from Frasier, a know it all neet who stands around 6'5 and weighs over 300 lbs with one yellow and one blue eye who and dressing in garish garb he rails against society while living with his mother. also its set in the 50's and there's a black character who talks like a nigger and its kinda amusing...

I think one of the reasons this was so heavily recommended is do to the author having killed himself somewhat young after failing to find a publisher for it, his mother rallied for it after his death where it found its audience and accolades, that being said it was a fine read i suppose the whole experience felt like a John Waters movie, strangely quirky.

My next read is "Tarzan".

 

[JJLiautaud]

The Divine Comedy, on the other hand, is the exact opposite of that. It's basically self insert Bible fanfiction where all the author's enemies inexplicably end up in hell.

Although being fair even though a lot of his enemies are in Hell some Saints and even close relations of his are in hell, an example is Francesca da Rimini, whose nephew played host to Dante, is in hell for an affair she had and her souls refusal to take responsibility for her actions.

 

[Ughubughughughughughghlug]

I got about halfway through Bless Me, Ultima before I ragequit it because it was so boring and shitty.

 

[Ughubughughughughughghlug]

I just finished "Confederacy of Dunces" it had alot of hype around it and now having read it i found it a bit underwhelming. It has its moments and the best part of the book for me is the Ignatius character, kinda a cross between the Dude from the Big Lebowski and Niles Crane from Frasier, a know it all neet who stands around 6'5 and weighs over 300 lbs with one yellow and one blue eye who and dressing in garish garb he rails against society while living with his mother. also its set in the 50's and there's a black character who talks like a nigger and its kinda amusing...

I think one of the reasons this was so heavily recommended is do to the author having killed himself somewhat young after failing to find a publisher for it, his mother rallied for it after his death where it found its audience and accolades, that being said it was a fine read i suppose the whole experience felt like a John Waters movie, strangely quirky.

My next read is "Tarzan".

If your Confederacy of Dunces experience was like mine it was a perfectly fine book, it just couldn't live up to the absurdly high standards. Not a bad book at all, just hyped up like it's the second coming of Christ.

His Moorish Crusade for Dignity was my favorite part.

It's been a long time since I read it, I hope it holds up.

The main narrative I remember is that the doctors call old demented geezers that are incapacitated but won't die - GOMERs ( Get  Out of My  Emergency  Room!).

They don't require any actual medical care, just nursing and Activities of Daily Living support.

But the doctors all hate them, mindless zombies clogging up their wards instead of leaving space for younger patients that possibly could actually be helped.

So they devise strategies to hike up the height of the hospital beds as high as they can so the GOMERs will fall out of bed and break their hips. Allowing transfer to the orthopedics ward where the bone docs can have their way with them.

Obviously fictional and satirized, but illustrative that even the doctors of half a century ago still hated seniors taking up space even before the West got old & fat & brown.

BTW I did finish it and it lost me by the end.
The beginning had promise. I can see why this thing would have become a classic among its target audience (other people in the medical profession). I can see the interesting character development and all that, it's literary. I can see the humor.

It just lost me through a sort of aimlessness and aggressive Jewishness. Constantly harping on psychiatry. Constant bitching about Nixon. Constant sex and cheating and stuff like that. I was just tired and discontent by the end. But it had potential at the start. I think it does have a good point to it about how it is cruel to keep these people around that have already had all the life drained from them.

 

[skykiii]

My next read is "Tarzan".

Let me know what you think of that. I recall reading the first Tarzan book a long time ago and being amazed it was actually so good... but I was younger then.

A thing about that is growing up I had never liked any Tarzan media, and always found the character and such stupid.... but then somehow I got interested in the original book and was shocked it was basically nothing like I remembered.

Going into the realm of film, but actually the best Tarzan movie is Greystoke: The Legend of Tarzan. The first half is a close adaptation of the novel, but the second goes a completely new direction... which actually works very well.

 

[Kerr Avon]

Greystoke: The Legend of Tarzan

Christopher Lambert ( and David Suchet ) chads rise up

 

[glass_houses]

A thing about that is growing up I had never liked any Tarzan media, and always found the character and such stupid.... but then somehow I got interested in the original book and was shocked it was basically nothing like I remembered.

I read Tarzan when I was a teenager, and I was pretty surprised by the same thing. I expected corny romantic notions of living in a jungle, instead I read an extremely well thought out theory of how an orphaned human child raised by animals would think, behave, and navigate through the world. I don't remember the second part of the book, but I do remember thinking, "This was written in 1912? Holy shit, this author is way ahead of his time."

 

[millais]

I can't find the exact posts in this thread, but a number of people made the same recommendation to avoid reading versions of Moby Dick with illustrations.

Why is that? I have been reading a version with the Rockwell Kent illustrations, and I found it a useful and not too obtrusive visual aid, since some of the more wordy descriptions about whale skeleton/anatomy or whaling tools and ship parts were hard for me to visualize without looking up examples of the thing being described.

 

[Holden Chamberlain]

Homer's Iliad and Odyssey. The former if you want lots of fighting and action, the latter if you want more adventure. Some advice with the Iliad, in book two when the armies begin to be introduced, feel free to skip ahead. It may be worthwhile on a reread, but it drags on and is only going to hold you up at first. I read the Robert Fagles translation of both and can recommend him, he wasn't too archaic and I enjoyed his style.

The Count of Monte Cristo. I really enjoyed it, even if it took me a long time to get through. In the middle there's a section which feels long and unrelated to the story, when he goes to Rome, but it does play in if you persevere through.

The Sailor Who Fell From Grace With The Sea by Yukio Mishima. It's a good introduction to his works and fairly short, although if you can't stomach violence there's a particular scene in it you may need to skip. Mishima is an interesting character on his own, starting a paramilitary organization and committing seppuku because he wanted the Japanese emperor back, there's a movie on him I haven't seen.

Obligatory Tolkien recommendation.

Heart of Darkness by Joseph Conrad. Great book by a great writer, Apocalypse Now is adapted from it. Anti-imperialism, but not so much in a "chastise the greedy white man" way, more in a "there's no point to bring civilization to these savages" way, at least that's my reading. I've also heard great things about Lord Jim and Nostromo, but haven't gotten around to reading those yet.

I saw Foundation mentioned earlier. I mostly agree with what was said. It's an interesting enough idea if a bit reddit, premise leans too much into the History from Below theory, when anyone who isn't a retarded communist should reject that for the Great Man theory or at least a mix of the two. The book itself disproves its premise from the beginning when it relies on certain important, unique individuals to protect the foundation and move the plan forward, with the plan obviously failing without them. There's one part where

Spoiler

the foundation is almost conquered by a very talented general, but isn't because the emperor recalls him at the last minute,

and this is somehow explained as the trend of history forcing this outcome. First three books are fairly enjoyable nonetheless if you can ignore this problem and just accept the premise.

Lovecraft has some great stories. Some of my favorites are The Festival, A Shadow over Innsmouth, The Outsider, and of course The Rats in the Walls, which gets bonus points for having Lovecraft's cat and it's lovely name in it (so long as the editors didn't change it in your copy).

Animal Farm is good and quick, definitely better than 1984 although that's not terrible either.

I've only read Notes from the Underground by Dostoevsky, but I'd definitely recommend that. Very insightful and engaging, Dostoevsky is worth his reputation. I like the Garnett translation if only for it's opening. For Brothers Karamazov I've heard good things about Ignat Avsey and that's what I bought, but you'll have to deal with the title being the nonstandard Karamazov Brothers; for Crime and Punishment I chose McDuff.

Since I'm a big fan of Nietzsche I'll end with a recommendation of his books. Honestly for a first time reader anything besides The Birth of Tragedy should be good to start with, but if you need a suggestion Thus Spoke Zarathustra is his most important work and contains the bulk of his ideas, otherwise Beyond Good and Evil followed by On the Genealogy of Morals works if you don't want to have to interpret as much from a story. Any translator will probably work, I myself have books done by different translators. Hollingdale is one of the better ones in my opinion, but even if you read Kaufmann you aren't about to get a shot of estrogen into your dick, just read his footnotes with a grain of salt.

 

[Johann Gambolputty...]

If you haven't read Sherlock Holmes by now, what the deuce? I recommend the first two short story collections, anything after that only if you're a fan by then, but the quality sort of drops off. If you read the novels, you can skip the whole bit about the Mormons in 'Scarlet', it adds nothing much to the narrative that isn't explained anyway in the typical "oh, you got me, now I'll tell you everything" wrap-up chapter. Also "Valley of Fear" is pretty missable. Fuck it, just read all of them XD Some useful backstory anyway that is used very well in the movies.

 

[Johann Gambolputty...]

Also since many of you are recommending Tolkien, why not look up the old Viking stories? Many of them were directly referenced for LoTR (Most of the dwarves in LoTR are named after dwarves in the sagas, 'Gandalf'='Wand elf', in old Norse, and the runes in illustration are borrowed from several European sets). The Poetic and Prose Eddas are good, the Ásatrú edda has it all a bit plainer, more modern language. It is strange, weird, wild, sometimes depressing, sometimes hilarious, sometimes a bit boring (Odin lists for us his many names). Easy to get in and out of too.

 

[Johann Gambolputty...]

IDK if Les Miserables has been mentioned but it's a classic for a reason. The unabridged version has a lot of history about France during the Napoleonic war and the French Revolution (including a glowing appraisal of the Parisian sewer system in the 1700s) and it actually ties into the main storyline very nicely. Reading any of the abridged versions leaves out a lot of background information but won't affect the main story too much.

Actually most of Victor Hugo's work goes in this thread.

Also why the hell am I the only one left posting here? O.o

 

[JJLiautaud]

Also why the hell am I the only one left posting here? O.o

Im trying to think of good one's to post.
Heinlein's Juveniles are peak teen-YA fiction and I can recommend them all, and most of them are worth reading if youre an adult as well.

 

[Johann Gambolputty...]

Im trying to think of good one's to post.
Heinlein's Juveniles are peak teen-YA fiction and I can recommend them all, and most of them are worth reading if youre an adult as well.

I've read some of Heinlein's books, I think Starship Troopers is required reading for anyone who would call themselves a sci-fi fan, but I'm not really into the military sci-fi genre. Some of my favorite sci-fi work is fantasy-adjacent (Anne McCaffrey and Edgar Rice Burroughs spring immediately to mind). And the classics that all popped up in the late 1800s, early 1900s from H. G. Wells, Mary Shelley, Jules Verne, Hugo Gernsback, etc. Just some comfortable, get lost in the adventure stuff.