The Great Books of the Western World

[JacobF]

I received this collection from my Dad this Christmas. My Dad received it from his Dad, so it is sort of like a family legacy. For those unfamiliar with the collection, it's a set of 54 of the "Great Books" which have contributed to the Western canon, or as Britannica calls it, the "great conversation" between all the greatest philosophers, playwrights and scientists of the Western world. Anyways, I'm eager to begin reading some of these dense texts but I'm wondering if there is anyone on this board who is familiar with the collection, or even those who are not who could give me some advice on how to approach these texts, because I'm not used to reading literature as heavy as this.

First question, should I bother reading the Syntopicons or should I just go straight into the texts? Second of all, should I read the texts in chronological order or does the order really matter? Third of all, since I don't want to spend time on works that have little validity today, should I ignore some of the early science texts (also, feel free to provide opinions on other texts which you feel aren't be meaningful enough to read the entire thing)? I understand that these questions are based mostly on personal interest, but I would like some input from more well-read individuals than I because these books are quite intimidating, albeit fascinating.

Here's the set of books included (first edition): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Books_of_the_Western_World

[Saladin]

WOW! That is outstanding collection (especially the second edition). But is it only me or is way to little poetry included in it? It`s lot of novels, philosophical writings, scientific and plays, but almost no poetry as far as i can see.

Regarding the order you should read it. I dont know how you want to the read the fiction works, but if you see the philosophical writings it is pretty much in a chronological order - from the greeks (Plato) in volume 7 to Wittgenstein in volume 55.

At a second look at the list its seems like its pretty chronological with maybe some few exceptions.

Four plays from Ibsen! :)

[wessexgirl]

What a wonderful present. That's a lifetime's reading there. I suppose how you approach it depends on how organised and methodical you are. Do you set yourself goals and targets, i.e. "I will start at the beginning and read so much every day", or do you tend to "dip in?" I know what I would like to be if it was me, (the former), but alas, in reality, I am probably more the latter. In fact, I know I am, as I have dozens of books lying around half read :(. Perhaps I should make it a resolution to get myself more organised this year and finish what I start! Good intentions and all that.....anyway, it's a lovely present, and I hope you enjoy it.

[JacobF]

What a wonderful present. That's a lifetime's reading there. I suppose how you approach it depends on how organised and methodical you are. Do you set yourself goals and targets, i.e. "I will start at the beginning and read so much every day", or do you tend to "dip in?" I know what I would like to be if it was me, (the former), but alas, in reality, I am probably more the latter. In fact, I know I am, as I have dozens of books lying around half read :(. Perhaps I should make it a resolution to get myself more organised this year and finish what I start! Good intentions and all that.....anyway, it's a lovely present, and I hope you enjoy it.

Thanks, I am sure I will enjoy it.

I usually don't 'dip in' to books because I don't see the point. I read a whole book then move on to the next. I can see, however, how that could be a viable approach to literature such as this. Today I did 'dip in' to some Plato and Aristotle, and both readings were quite enjoyable. I think I'm going to go as chronologically as I can, and just read whatever I want for now. I'm not necessarily of the ideal age to be reading these books and I am not going to get as much out of them as I could if I were older.

And Saladin, there seems to be quite a bit of poetry in there from what I can tell. There's Homer, Virgil, Dante and Sophocles. By the way, I don't have the second edition unfortunately. Only the first.

[LitNetIsGreat]

My god what a present!

I can't tell you how to approach it but I think I would approach it by taking a bit from each in chronological order. This way I suppose you could sort of build a framework around which you can keep going back to in order to build up your knowledge over time. It seems silly spending years reading everything by the earlier writers and nothing by Shakespeare for instance. I would get a rough feel for each writer in chronological order and keep going back dipping into what I was more interested in. It's a great gift, perhaps the greatest.

[JacobF]

My god what a present!

I can't tell you how to approach it but I think I would approach it by taking a bit from each in chronological order. This way I suppose you could sort of build a framework around which you can keep going back to in order to build up your knowledge over time. It seems silly spending years reading everything by the earlier writers and nothing by Shakespeare for instance. I would get a rough feel for each writer in chronological order and keep going back dipping into what I was more interested in. It's a great gift, perhaps the greatest.

Yeah, I'm just going to 'explore' it for now and gradually develop a plan. For instance, I am really eager to read Sigmund Freud's works, but they are last of the volumes, so if I went strictly chronologically I would have to wait a while to read him, and that's kind of silly.

[LitNetIsGreat]

Yes exactly you could not be getting on to Freud for another ten years otherwise.