How do you choose which 'Western Canon' books or classics to read?

[TurquoiseSunset]

I've been looking at loads of lists lately and although I don't believe in religiously sticking to a list or lists I do think they can be helpful in giving you an idea on what to read next, but they can also be very overwhelming.

I specifically ask about Western Canon because anything else is easy to pick...I read the back and if it looks good that's that. Classics and literature that can be defined as "great works of artistic merit" is a little more difficult for me. It doesn't help that I'm generally indecisive about these things and usually I read books for pleasure, be they classic or otherwise. In this case reading is more for...study (hate hate that word, but you know what I mean)? How do you decide? Where did you start?

[Handler]

If you just set out to "read the classics," it might be quite a slog. The best thing to do, in my opinion, is find one book that you really love and then let your curiosity about that author and that author's favorite authors - they all have favorites, lead you to another book, etc. In a way, you're taking recommendations from people you've come to trust like friends, and friends with specialized knowledge. And hopefully then you'll be approaching the next book with excitement rather than trepidation. Follow those connections long enough and you'll eventually find you've covered a wide swath of classics in a kind of natural, personal process.

[Sebas. Melmoth]

Two good options:
follow Harold Bloom:

http://www.amazon.com/Western-Canon-Books-School-Ages/dp/1573225142/ref=sr_1_11?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1273062948&sr=1-11

or, even better, Jacques Barzun:

http://www.amazon.com/Dawn-Decadence-Western-Cultural-Present/dp/0060928832/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1273063026&sr=1-1

[gruntingslime]

I agree with Handler on that one. I used to have a strong prejudice against classics when I tried to read Moby Dick at 13. Later on in a literature class we had to read Camus, Kafka, and Dosteovsky and I loved them all. Later I branched off from those authors and found tons of authors that I appreciate.

[kiki1982]

I don't know, I guess I just read what takes my fancy.

I only started a few years ago on English because I wondered how different Jane Eyre was from Jane Eyre in a few adaptations. So I wanted to know what the real thing was.

I saw Lost in Austen, liking the stories on TV, but not in real life. I had tried them when I was a teenager, but obviously I couldn't understand (English is my third language). Anyway, so I saw Lost in Austen, and I thought, 'man this is great!' Would the real thing be as fun? And I read it in barely one week and went from there. I only have two Austens left to read now...

I am mainly going through Penguin (English only) because they are cheap and I like doing my own research. I should start on more French, but they are more expensive. I guess more pages to read... Though, I have discovered that Livre de Poche editors also post them to you with some great deals.

I guess following lists can give some inspiration, but I wouldn't read something because it is next on the list... Then I really do not get through it.

[TurquoiseSunset]

Two good options:
follow Harold Bloom:

http://www.amazon.com/Western-Canon-Books-School-Ages/dp/1573225142/ref=sr_1_11?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1273062948&sr=1-11

or, even better, Jacques Barzun:

http://www.amazon.com/Dawn-Decadence-Western-Cultural-Present/dp/0060928832/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1273063026&sr=1-1

Heh, believe me when I tell you I know about all the lists out there, but thanks. I just really want to know how people come to choose from those lists (If they don't use lists I would like to know how they do it as well).

It's not like I've never read classics, I just have a hard time choosing, especially when it's for a reason other than just plain enjoyment.

[Handler]

What are you reading for then, I wonder. If it's not for enjoyment, you're probably screwed.

[TurquoiseSunset]

I guess following lists can give some inspiration, but I wouldn't read something because it is next on the list... Then I really do not get through it.

Exactly. Usually I also just pick them by whatever takes my fancy. That way I enjoy them and read something of classical merit. Then I take a look at all the lists and lists and lists and I go cross-eyed. I want to read more classics (and enjoy them obviously) but sometimes it's just daunting picking one if I've never read the author before.

Also, it's super annoying when I do research about a classic and people give away major plot points. I mean, I realise it's big and famous, but that does not mean everyone's read it right?

[TurquoiseSunset]

What are you reading for then, I wonder. If it's not for enjoyment, you're probably screwed.

Hehehe, I know. You would think that was the only reason why people read, but ask a few litnetters their opinion on the subject and you'll get a million and one different answers.

See, how do you choose books you enjoy? It's usually because it looks interesting or because it's similar to others you have enjoyed. Many classics do not fall into that category for me, so I'm reluctant to try them, but I'm scared I might miss out on some really good ones...there's a reason they are classics.

I'm just interested to know other people's methods.

[Handler]

When it comes to great works of literature, a lot of people, myself included, would say that finding out what happens is only a fraction of what the book has to offer. On the other hand, no, there's nothing wrong with not having read something and wanting to enjoy it spoiler free. But, I'll say it again, if you're trying to cover the western canon simply as a self-improvement project or, I don't know, to learn something useful, you're starting off on the wrong foot.

I would recommend taking the Nabokov course. Buy a copy of his "lectures on literature," as well as the 5 or 6 books on the "syllabus," Mansfield Park, Madame Bovary, The Metamorphosis, Swann's Way (a must, in my opinion, though not that easy), etc. I might skip Ulysses unless you're up for it. Read the books and "attend the lectures," so to speak. That's a really good place to enter "the western canon."

[togre]

In my reading I try to mix enjoyable books with ones that may be a bit of slog to get through. If you have read some of the greats, you know which you enjoy or at least tolerate. Read a couple by the same author or in a similar style (even if they aren't on the list or hardcore, nerd-level classics) and then grind through one book that expands your horizons (a style or author you know nothing of or a book you dread). Don't feel like you have to read Moby Dick and then War and Peace and then whatever other massive tome. Mix it up. Take baby steps. Also, I some times read several books at once. I have some junkfood novel I'm reading just for fun, I have some serious book I'm also reading in free time and then I have a third book I read just at lunch--this works well because no matter how dull or dry I keep plodding along and eventual finish it.

But your results may vary.

[TurquoiseSunset]

I think people have misunderstood what I asked...or maybe I didn't word it correctly. I didn't mean I want to get into classics and don't know how, because I already read them, and like I said, I am familiar with the hundereds of lists available.

I just wanted to know other people's methods of choosing the next one, because I sometimes get overwhelmed by all the choices. It was just for interest's sake...not because I'm starting a literary Julie/Julia project.

Thanks to those who have shared what they do though!

[Handler]

Turquoise - this is the last I'll say on this, then I'll move aside so other folks can share their "methods," which are all basically the same: one book at a time.

[LitNetIsGreat]

The suggestion of moving with an author you like is quite a good one. For me for example I was hooked with Wilde instantly when I first read him about 8 or 9 years ago – (was it really less than a decade ago?). I then read (or re-read) a host of other things, Wilde’s influences and contemporaries through Wilde as it were. However, this was on top of my part-time degree in Literature and Creative Media where I obviously had more structure with my reading, studying particular areas or movements of literature in the usual way. So, personally I feel like I have had the best of both, a drifting of interest and something more formally structured.

When it comes to lists, yes I think they are a good indicator for the reasons given, but I do feel that while it is a good idea to “drift” between texts, moving with what takes your fancy, an author or style or whatever, I also think that some sort of more formal structure is a good idea with your reading. So for example instead of simply reading a classic modernist text like say Woolf and then moving onto say Ovid or something, it may better serve you to get a picture of modernism, an overview, taste a few books in this area, read critically around the movement in general and then move on to something else. Really I think the best way to go about it if you are not studying literature (or even if you are) is to follow some sort of university syllabus generally, but at the same time feel free to drift when the need arises, don’t feel too tied down to it, we shouldn't lose sight of what reading is all about in the end.

[keilj]

It has been sort of tricky for me. In some cases I've gone with an author that I have liked. For example, I liked Of Mice and Men when I was younger. So eventually when I got older, I tried some others by Steinbeck, like Cannery Row, In Dubious Battle, and To a God Unknown

In other cases, I have just tried picking something up at the book store that looked somewhat interesting. I don't know what possessed me to pick up Babbitt for the first time and buy it - but as a result I became a huge fan of Lewis and have read nearly all of his novels now

I have also tried authors based on my own gut, or on the suggestion of others. This can be hit and miss, but without doing it, I would not have found some good books. I read Clockers just becasue I liked the movie - and it turns out I think Price's writing style is very good. On the other hand, I tried some Elmore Leonard stuff based on a recommendation of a friend, and I ended up not liking his books much

But, as you mentioned earlier (I think), I don't care much for the big literary lists, and I don't take much stock in them. I can live without some of the favorites like Jane Austen and Faulkner. And, often the books on those lists are not even my favorites by that particular writer. (I liked Twain's autobiography infinitely more than Tom Sawyer, and Dostoevsky's The Possessed way more than Crime and Punishment)

[gruntingslime]

Apart from looking at the influences of the authors I like, I sometimes go on amazon and look at the recommendations for books I really like. I generally do as much research on a book as I can before I actually get around to reading it, for example what it's about and the type of themes addressed as well as the writing style of the book. I'll often have a feeling related to what's going on in my life, or changes I'd like to make or progress I'd like to make in my person, and find something that relates to those things. For example I'm really interested in surrealism, and I was longing to make my writing more simplistic. I seemed to be over complicating everything I said, so I looked for works with very simple prose. I obsessed for over a year trying to find a copy of Joko's Anniversary by Roland Topor and finally did. It turns out my search for the book had a bigger effect on me than actually reading it, mostly because of the lesson behind becoming compulsive and monomaniacal. Also, over such a long period of time, I developed intricate fantasies about what the book would be like until the book itself became superfluous.

[Whifflingpin]

I've never taken books from a list - I guess I'm too arrogant, after all my opinion is as good as Bloom's, whoever he is.

I have read books because:

they were on school curricula;

they are so frequently mentioned that they obviously need to be read, or at least attempted;

they had interesting titles;

they were mentioned in other books;

their authors were alphabetically close to some other author I liked, so they were on the same library shelf - (don't reject that out of hand - I found my way to Joyce Carol-Oates, Colleen McCullough and Jasper fforde that way;)

they were classics in their time - e.g. Gil Blas, Thaddeus of Warsaw;

other people whose opinions I respected suggested them;

they were by an author of a book I'd previously enjoyed

etc.

Read widely, grab what you can, never be put off by genre, absence from lists etc.

[dfloyd]

are not popularity contests as many are. They are books presented as a lifetime reading plan. They go from Gilgamesh to modern. Many books would be entirely missed by readers without consulting Bloom or Fadiman. I have read most of Bloom's Western Canon, and I am much the better reader for it. I usually skip around a bit since one can get in a rut just reading from one time period. Bloom's Western Canon is totally different from a Modern Library or Editor's of Time list.

[Evaril]

Most of the lists you've probably been looking at have a lot of titles in common, such as Iliad, Pride and Prejudice, Faust, etc. Why don't you start with those, the apparently best and most widely-agreed on? Those alone will take up a long time. While you're working on them, you'll find that you will have developed your own idea of what a classic should be like, and you'll come to know the world of literature well enough to recognize what other great books there are out there, especially those which influenced these greatest. And for all you know, you may just wish to stick to and reread these titles and forget the rest, which can be good or bad.

[mal4mac]

I don't think one book at a time is a good idea. Try that with Dante and you are in for some hard weeks in Hell, with no relaxation! With some serious classics 'little and often' is my favoured approach. Dante, fortunately, provides his own bite size chunks (cantos) and I am proceeding happily through the 'Comedy' at one canto a day. Note, also, the greatest classics should be the most pleasurable read - not just a 'hard study' - taking pleasure in its highest and broadest sense (reflecting everything form eating ice cream to solving a chess puzzle.) So if you aren't finding pleasure in a classic you are not reading it correctly, through lack of experience, or not taking the right approach. With Dante the pain comes mainly from not understanding the profusion of classical and Italian references. Once you 'get' them, though, they are a source of pleasure. You need good notes. But digesting notes isn't a pleasure. That's why bite size chunks are necessary - you can eat your greens happily enough if there aren't too many of them. Also dwell on the meat - dwell on Dante's images and metaphors - to try and get the full impact (and pleasure!) from your reading.

I'm now reading the classics from the top down (skipping the Bible!), so that's Shakespeare and Dante to start with (and for many months!) These are hard reads, and I get weary after an hour or so of such fare. So I then turn to classics that appear slightly further down the list, but are easier reads (Tolstoy, Dickens, Eliot...) I could probably push through a book at a time if I had to, but that would make it seem like study. The 'some hard', 'some easy' approach is the best way for me to get though the classics while enjoying them.

Note - I have found a way to read Dante and Shakespeare with pleasure, but not the Bible. If you make a reasonable effort to read a classic but just find it to be too much of a pain then turn to another classic of equal merit. Most critics think Shakespeare is the greatest classic, and though he is hard, he is not so hard as the competition (Dante, Bible) so I'd say his 'complete works' is the place to start if you want to tackle a top-draw classic. But - little and often - between a scene/act per day.

[Pryderi Agni]

I pretty much ask :)

I've made threads here at LitNet, and I've also talked to knowledgeable people, just so I can discover which classic is worth reading & which is worth consigning to the trash.

[dfloyd]

are the works of Virginia Woolf.

[LitNetIsGreat]

are the works of Virginia Woolf.

Ha, ha you always bash Woolf - tut, tut.

[Virgil]

Turquise - You might want to google great novels and you'll get several lists. Also if you can get college level reading lists or curriculum you will get a list of the great works to read.


Two good options:
follow Harold Bloom:

http://www.amazon.com/Western-Canon-Books-School-Ages/dp/1573225142/ref=sr_1_11?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1273062948&sr=1-11

or, even better, Jacques Barzun:

http://www.amazon.com/Dawn-Decadence-Western-Cultural-Present/dp/0060928832/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1273063026&sr=1-1

I highly recommend that Jacques Barzun book. One of the best commentary on western culture from an art perspective, art inclusive of music and literature and fine arts.

[OrphanPip]

Note - I have found a way to read Dante and Shakespeare with pleasure, but not the Bible. If you make a reasonable effort to read a classic but just find it to be too much of a pain then turn to another classic of equal merit. Most critics think Shakespeare is the greatest classic, and though he is hard, he is not so hard as the competition (Dante, Bible) so I'd say his 'complete works' is the place to start if you want to tackle a top-draw classic. But - little and often - between a scene/act per day.

I just have to comment on that being a strange way to read Shakespeare. I try to read the plays in one sitting whenever possible, I think you get more out of them that way. This isn't just for Shakespeare though, but for any play. Although, I don't find him the least bit difficult to read.

A great way to make reading Shakespeare easier is to follow along while watching a faithful production of the play. King Lear never clicked with me until I'd seen it performed.

[ktm5124]

Be a nomad - better yet, a viking. Sack, pillage, and burn :-)

To be more serious -

There are many canons and categories within the larger Western canon. I find it most satisfying to focus on one or two of these sub-canons, or categories, for a time (movements, countries, eras) and then move on to others, while at the same time revisiting my favorite authors. This way you not only add to your list of favorite authors, but expand your sense of context, which will enrich your experience when you read your favorite authors. Developing your tastes is a recursive process - explore, revisit, explore, revisit.

[JBI]

Just get a nice book out, and read around it. I read poetry, so if I want English poets, I flip open my Norton to someone I don't know, and dig up a volume of his/her work from the library, devour it, and look around them - for prose it is trickier, and for philosophy it is easier. Philosophy is anthologized for convenience, so just look for the big thinkers in chronological order. For novels, it doesn't particularly matter; they all are pretty similar beyond the major names - once you get beyond the obvious, it really depends on your own interest; by then you will know what you like, and will know what you have time for.

My general opinion is really to just look at what your favorite authors read, and go from there. As for Western Canon books, well, you've pretty much limited yourself already, so shouldn't have too much difficulty just reading the slew of Penguins in order of their sales figures as befits such a notion.

[kasie]

are the works of Virginia Woolf.

That, sir, is fighting talk.

[mal4mac]

I just have to comment on that being a strange way to read Shakespeare. I try to read the plays in one sitting whenever possible, I think you get more out of them that way.

How can 'little and often' be a strange way to read Shakespeare? Every school teaches it that way - so by the definition of strange, surely, it is not a strange way.

Dr Johnson recommends, on a first pass, just reading (or watching) a Shakespeare play right through without trying to understand all the vocab. or all the philosophically dense parts. I can see the sense of this, and I've already seen most of Shakespeare's major plays several times taking this approach. But now I'm reading his complete works, trying to understand 'everything'. I don't like to concentrate *really* hard for long periods. Others may differ, but I don't think my approach is strange at all.

[Drkshadow03]

I've been looking at loads of lists lately and although I don't believe in religiously sticking to a list or lists I do think they can be helpful in giving you an idea on what to read next, but they can also be very overwhelming.

I specifically ask about Western Canon because anything else is easy to pick...I read the back and if it looks good that's that. Classics and literature that can be defined as "great works of artistic merit" is a little more difficult for me. It doesn't help that I'm generally indecisive about these things and usually I read books for pleasure, be they classic or otherwise. In this case reading is more for...study (hate hate that word, but you know what I mean)? How do you decide? Where did you start?

The way I originally did it for Beyond Assumptions (http://beyondassumptions.wordpress.com/) was to read in time and cultural order. So I started with the Ancient Greeks, excluding Indian literature and Chinese literature unfortunately because I originally planned to do them as a unit on their own later on. Then I moved onto Ancient Roman literature. I put together most of the titles by going to these lists (http://www.interleaves.org/~rteeter/ReadingLists.html) at this site (http://www.interleaves.org/~rteeter/greatbks.html).

While I enjoyed doing it this way, I admit I got burned out from it. I read a decent chunk of Plato for example, but I originally intended to include ALL his major texts. I ended up excluding a few that I had originally intended to read because I lost interest and got tired of reading all that Plato.

The same happened with Roman literature. I think I read the cream of the crop, but my original reading list was much more extensive.

I never moved on to the Middle Ages, but instead found myself skipping further ahead and just reading whatever I felt like. It's hard to keep to a rigorous list. It's easy to get bored or just tired of material that reads a certain way and certain genres and tropes and such.

[LitNetIsGreat]

I think that's the problem with reading solely to a list, as I said earlier or some place else, you get burned out. Better I think to have a split between reading for pleasure and reading for study. Of course it is hoped that the two overlap a great deal obviously but at least you get to read where your fancy takes you and you have more freedom that way. At the moment I am managing to find a nice little balance between reading for uni and reading for myself because I am nearly done with the uni business.

[Gilliatt Gurgle]

I tend to agree with Whifflingpin's assessment.
Grade school introduced me to Dickens, Verne, Swift, Shakespeare...

My parents library along with my maternal grandfather's library, now inherited, has had the most influence on what I choose to read for the simple fact that my choices are lining the walls. At one point in my past, I set an unrealistic goal to read all of the books from the inherited collection. However, as I read one particular author, I become intrigued and venture outside of that collection to read more on that particular author.

Lastly, this Forum has opened my eyes even further.

The greatest obstacle is time.

[mal4mac]

I think that's the problem with reading solely to a list, as I said earlier or some place else, you get burned out. Better I think to have a split between reading for pleasure and reading for study. Of course it is hoped that the two overlap a great deal obviously but at least you get to read where your fancy takes you and you have more freedom that way. At the moment I am managing to find a nice little balance between reading for uni and reading for myself because I am nearly done with the uni business.

I partly disagree - it should *all* be reading for pleasure. But I don't have to attend an institution...

But I definitely agree that you are likely to get burned out following, say, Bloom's list in order of canonical greatness. At one point I was reading Bible, Homer, Shakespeare, Dante at the same time, but realised this was just silly, and stopped before brain combustion occurred.

To find the pleasure in hard works (if they have any pleasure in them!) I slow down, take them one at a time, and do just a little every day.

What do you read to bring down the temperature, while still reading something great & pleasurable? I find 19th century novelists to be optimal - Hardy, Dickens, Tolstoy,...

[LitNetIsGreat]

I partly disagree - it should *all* be reading for pleasure. But I don't have to attend an institution...

But I definitely agree that you are likely to get burned out following, say, Bloom's list in order of canonical greatness. At one point I was reading Bible, Homer, Shakespeare, Dante at the same time, but realised this was just silly, and stopped before brain combustion occurred.

To find the pleasure in hard works (if they have any pleasure in them!) I slow down, take them one at a time, and do just a little every day.

What do you read to bring down the temperature, while still reading something great & pleasurable? I find 19th century novelists to be optimal - Hardy, Dickens, Tolstoy,...

Well it depends what you are reading for. If someone is religiously following a list, be it a personal agenda or one for study (it doesn’t matter), then you are naturally going to prefer certain works over others – but even so it is all good for knowledge of course.

Well I am devoted to Jeeves and Wooster at the moment. I have several of the books and I am watching the complete series with Stephen Fry and Hugh Laurie as much as possible – jolly well dashing stuff!

[TurquoiseSunset]

I don't think one book at a time is a good idea. Try that with Dante and you are in for some hard weeks in Hell, with no relaxation! With some serious classics 'little and often' is my favoured approach. Dante, fortunately, provides his own bite size chunks (cantos) and I am proceeding happily through the 'Comedy' at one canto a day. ... With Dante the pain comes mainly from not understanding the profusion of classical and Italian references. Once you 'get' them, though, they are a source of pleasure. You need good notes. But digesting notes isn't a pleasure. That's why bite size chunks are necessary - you can eat your greens happily enough if there aren't too many of them. Also dwell on the meat - dwell on Dante's images and metaphors - to try and get the full impact (and pleasure!) from your reading.

Actually I'm currently busy with Inferno and have found that 2 Cantos a day work wonderful! What I do is print out the day's Cantos from Litnet and read them along side my translation (Steve Ellis, 1994, Vintage Books), which is modern but good and then I print out their sparknotes from the internet. If I miss anything between Steve's notes and Sparknotes, I'm not really interested. So I totally agree with you on that method. I don't do the same with Shakespeare, but I suppose it would work for some.


Turquise - You might want to google great novels and you'll get several lists. Also if you can get college level reading lists or curriculum you will get a list of the great works to read.



I highly recommend that Jacques Barzun book. One of the best commentary on western culture from an art perspective, art inclusive of music and literature and fine arts.

Thanks for the Jacques Barzun tip! Maybe if I'm not feeling so lazy later I'll list the lists I have :D ...actually I even have most of them arranged in a spreadsheet :out: [nerd alert!!!]


A great way to make reading Shakespeare easier is to follow along while watching a faithful production of the play. King Lear never clicked with me until I'd seen it performed.

I agree. I watch the movie first and then read it with notes. English is not my first language so when I haven't read Shakespeare in a while (read: years and years) I need all the help I can get getting into it again. Once I get going it's fine though. I have to admit I'm not a great fan of anything Shakespeare with King in the title...but I'll give it another go O-P :D


As for Western Canon books, well, you've pretty much limited yourself already, so shouldn't have too much difficulty just reading the slew of Penguins in order of their sales figures as befits such a notion.

Nope, the question was about Classics and Western Canon, but it's not all I read. :)


The way I originally did it for Beyond Assumptions (http://beyondassumptions.wordpress.com/) was to read in time and cultural order. ...

While I enjoyed doing it this way, I admit I got burned out from it.

Hm, that's why I feel the way I do about lists...they can be helpful, but should not be followed religiously. That's why I asked everyone's opinion's on the matter. When I start looking at the all the lists I get scared I might lose my love of reading if I only ever read off one (or a few...same difference). So I think you were very brave and I'll definitely give your blog a look!

Thanks to everyone for their answers! It's always interesting to find out how others operate :D

[Whifflingpin]

"But I definitely agree that you are likely to get burned out following, say, Bloom's list in order of canonical greatness."

I suppose, if you were inclined to do anything as daft as read though a ranked list, you should start with the worst, because then things would get better as you went on.

[mal4mac]

"But I definitely agree that you are likely to get burned out following, say, Bloom's list in order of canonical greatness."

I suppose, if you were inclined to do anything as daft as read though a ranked list, you should start with the worst, because then things would get better as you went on.

So reading Shakespeare is daft?


Actually I'm currently busy with Inferno and have found that 2 Cantos a day work wonderful! What I do is print out the day's Cantos from Litnet and read them along side my translation (Steve Ellis, 1994, Vintage Books), which is modern but good and then I print out their sparknotes from the internet. If I miss anything between Steve's notes and Sparknotes, I'm not really interested. So I totally agree with you on that method.

I was very tempted by Ellis, I read a few Canto's and (slightly) preferred him to Mandelbaum. But Mandelbaum covers the whole Comedy, so I decided to go with him. I'm cantering through Paradise at the moment and have seen no drop off in quality (of text or notes) since the first canto of Inferno... I think Mandelbaum could be clearer and more concise in a few places, and he could translate the Latin as well as the Italian! But, overall, it's a very good experience. (The notes provide the Latin translations...) I thought it might be a hard chore to read through the Comedy, but I now look forward to my daily canto more than I do to my cheese scone (not daily now.. need to lose weight...)

[kelby_lake]

I've been looking at loads of lists lately and although I don't believe in religiously sticking to a list or lists I do think they can be helpful in giving you an idea on what to read next, but they can also be very overwhelming.

I specifically ask about Western Canon because anything else is easy to pick...I read the back and if it looks good that's that. Classics and literature that can be defined as "great works of artistic merit" is a little more difficult for me. It doesn't help that I'm generally indecisive about these things and usually I read books for pleasure, be they classic or otherwise. In this case reading is more for...study (hate hate that word, but you know what I mean)? How do you decide? Where did you start?

Shakespeare's a good start. You have three types- Comedies, Tragedies and Histories. Richard III and Henry V are deemed to be the better histories- Richard III is probably most accessible. A Midsummer Night's Dream and Much Ado About Nothing are good comedies and very accessible. Tragedies, you could go for Hamlet, Othello...anything really.
If you like fantasy, go for The Tempest or one of the other 'romances'.

After you've read something- let's say you read 'The Tempest'- you then might read a few books about the play, read the other 'romances, watch the film (the BBC have done a filmed version of every Shakespeare play), read 'Brave New World' (the title comes from a line in The Tempest), etc...
Keep looking for links.

[TurquoiseSunset]

I was very tempted by Ellis, I read a few Canto's and (slightly) preferred him to Mandelbaum. But Mandelbaum covers the whole Comedy, so I decided to go with him. I'm cantering through Paradise at the moment and have seen no drop off in quality (of text or notes) since the first canto of Inferno... I think Mandelbaum could be clearer and more concise in a few places, and he could translate the Latin as well as the Italian! But, overall, it's a very good experience. (The notes provide the Latin translations...) I thought it might be a hard chore to read through the Comedy, but I now look forward to my daily canto more than I do to my cheese scone (not daily now.. need to lose weight...)

I'll definitely keep Mandelbaum in mind for the next book. It's the worst to have a translator ruin a book for you, so it's nice knowing there's someone worthwhile next up. Thanks!!

[mal4mac]

I'll definitely keep Mandelbaum in mind for the next book. It's the worst to have a translator ruin a book for you, so it's nice knowing there's someone worthwhile next up. Thanks!!

I think Mandelbaum's a fairly safe bet, he tends to get good marks for fidelity of translation and is a *relatively* easy read. I also think Dante keeps up the quality throughout (what an imagination!) - and the number of obscure Italians decreases...

The subtlety of thought Dante applies is amazing, especially in the Cantos on heaven I'm reading at the moment. For instance, I've just travelled with him & Beatrice up to the sphere of the moon. He asks the spirits how they can be in such a low sphere when the perfect love of God should raise them to the highest heaven? Dante provides some amazing answers to this and similar questions including... well you'll just have to read the book :)

[blazeofglory]

Deciding on what to read is a matter of choice and my mind oscillate like a pendulum, now this, now that and I leave many books half-read and few go completed.

Yet some books always intriguer me and I found not a single line redundant. That is the Brothers Karamazov

[Wilde woman]

I'm very skeptical of lists, from Bloom or otherwise, especially when they claim to cover the entire Western canon. No one person can be an expert on the entire canon, so it's fallacious to think that you can do so by reading a slew of books recommended by someone else. (And what about eastern texts? Is there a list of the "Eastern canon"?)


I read poetry, so if I want English poets, I flip open my Norton to someone I don't know, and dig up a volume of his/her work from the library, devour it, and look around them...

JBI, you beat me to it! I, too, am a fan of Norton editions. I love reading the original for myself, building my own interpretation, and then having a set of essays right in the appendix to see what other critics have to say. The Nortons also come with a nice bibliography of further reading, so I usually start there if I want more criticism or related primary texts. I'd rather read within my interests, and see where that takes me, rather than on anyone else's list.


I never moved on to the Middle Ages, but instead found myself skipping further ahead and just reading whatever I felt like.

Tsk tsk! You're missing some really good medieval stuff, esp. after all your work in the Classics.


The subtlety of thought Dante applies is amazing, especially in the Cantos on heaven I'm reading at the moment. For instance, I've just travelled with him & Beatrice up to the sphere of the moon. He asks the spirits how they can be in such a low sphere when the perfect love of God should raise them to the highest heaven? Dante provides some amazing answers to this and similar questions including... well you'll just have to read the book

I'm glad you enjoyed it. Paradiso's 2nd canto is notoriously difficult, especially in terms of its theology and philosophy. Dante even shows some of his physics training there! I was especially taken by his explanation for the moonspots. The light imagery in Paradiso is just breathtaking. I recently read an essay by Umberto Eco on the light in Paradiso and he makes quite a nice case.

[Drkshadow03]

Tsk tsk! You're missing some really good medieval stuff, esp. after all your work in the Classics.



Honestly. I'd be happy to find time to read anything at the moment.

[fb0252]

Wilde Woman, question whether you'd be skeptical if you actually read Bloom's Western Cannon. There are readers and readers. Would say Bloom may be the all time champion. But, you can be skeptical if you choose. Bloom lists but 26 as the best. His opinion, but, doubtful he's far off. So, if you want to read the best, do you start there?

[OrphanPip]

How can 'little and often' be a strange way to read Shakespeare? Every school teaches it that way - so by the definition of strange, surely, it is not a strange way.

Dr Johnson recommends, on a first pass, just reading (or watching) a Shakespeare play right through without trying to understand all the vocab. or all the philosophically dense parts. I can see the sense of this, and I've already seen most of Shakespeare's major plays several times taking this approach. But now I'm reading his complete works, trying to understand 'everything'. I don't like to concentrate *really* hard for long periods. Others may differ, but I don't think my approach is strange at all.

I'm a little late on this response. Anyway, even if schools prefer to teach it this way, plays are intended to be viewed in one sitting. I agree a more thorough understanding requires a gradual indepth study of individual scenes, but only after having read the entire thing at least once.

Although, whatever works best for you is fine, it's just not the way I would approach drama.

[jocky]

University was a wonderful experience for the simple reason of accessability to books. It did not matter if you were studying the Arts or Sciences, you had the ability to browse and ignore your tutors. Of course, it did not help if you were reading Darwin while studying for a theological degree. The holy grail was learning.