Biggest book you've ever read?

[AbbeyMadison]

I'll start.

The biggest book I've ever read was the 1,022 page fiction/visionary masterpiece "Lamonga: River of the Seven Spirits" by Dann O Ryan.

It is a stunning portrayal of the great American West, the disappearance of the Indians, the mysticism of spiritual belief and of the unknown subconscious, all told through one boy's dream within a dream...within a dream. For an epic, it is extraordinarily gripping and emotional, with dark caves of philosophy (literally) and even a poetic journey through the wonders of the universe.

And the illustrations!!! There was one for every chapter, which came to about 55 (I counted).

Proof: https://www.facebook.com/LamongaRiverOfTheSevenSpirits

1,022 wasn't enough. I wanted more. But alas, I suppose that is the test of a good book . . .

What was your "biggest" book?

[Iain Sparrow]

Atlas Shrugged, by Ayn Rand... as I recall it topped 1,000 pages, and reading each and every page was pure torture.
Never again would I picked up a book written by that Russian Witch.
Gore Vidal said of Rand's masterpiece "it must be read to be believed" and that "Her 'philosophy' is nearly perfect in its immorality"... I could not agree more with that review.

[Clopin]

War and Peace

[bounty]

ive not read war and peace yet, but use of the title kinda remains the standard cliché for long (and arduous?) things doesn't it?

the sum of all fears by tom Clancy was 928 pages. it was too long I think and could have used some editing.

[YesNo]

I often don't finish books even if they are a reasonable size, say, under 300 pages. So 300 pages is probably the longest book I've read all the way through.

I have attempted some long books such as Joyce's "Finnegan's Wake". I started it after I read on a Lit Net thread that someone else couldn't make sense out of it. I figured with my brains and all I should be able to do better. I got through two pages.

[Pompey Bum]

For current fiction, probably A Suitable Boy by Vikram Seth (1474 pages long, at least in my paperback edition). But Journey to the West, Romance of the Three Kingdoms, Dream of the Red Chamber, and Outlaws of the Marsh were all longer. (And I read 900 to 1000+ page non-fiction all the time). I know this is miserly, but if books are too short I feel like I'm being ripped off.

Thanks for the recommendation, Abbey. I'll check it out. You're not a shill are you?

[Clopin]

Shill most likely.

[Pompey Bum]

Well, I'm not getting anything on Amazon for that title, but I am getting all kinds of information about an Eagle Scout who has been coordinating work on this book.

Baron's Eagle project involved a 1,022-page fiction book titled 'Lamonga, River of the Seven Spirits.' He organized the writing, illustrators and publication. The project took three years and involved over 20 people.

http://www.news-leader.com/story/news/local/ozarks/2014/10/15/nixa-eagle-scout-earns-possible-badges/17142073/

He looks like a nice kid. What's the story here, Abbey?

[Aperta Verbum]

Probably Middlemarch, if it wasn't the longest it seemed like it. Only on the second chapter of Ulysses so I'll see how I feel after that.

[Poetaster]

Complete work of Plato. 2,000 pages.

[AbbeyMadison]

Complete work of Plato. 2,000 pages.

... wow. That's quite impressive! :)

[Pompey Bum]

Isn't it. ;-)

[AbbeyMadison]

Well, I'm not getting anything on Amazon for that title, but I am getting all kinds of information about an Eagle Scout who has been coordinating work on this book.

Baron's Eagle project involved a 1,022-page fiction book titled 'Lamonga, River of the Seven Spirits.' He organized the writing, illustrators and publication. The project took three years and involved over 20 people.

http://www.news-leader.com/story/news/local/ozarks/2014/10/15/nixa-eagle-scout-earns-possible-badges/17142073/

He looks like a nice kid. What's the story here, Abbey?

What's a "shill"...?

My friend knows some of the people involved in that huge boy scout project and apparently, the publishing company hasn't distributed it yet, which is why we can't find it on Amazon or for sale anywhere. Which makes me feel special because I got a sneak peek at the manuscript edition and I feel like this is going to be famous someday ^^ I actually went to summer camp with Baron a few years ago and although I didn't get to know him very well, he seemed pretty interesting, and I am not at all surprised he produced something like this.

According to the article (and to my friend) a team was assembled for the actual production of the book, but the story was written by Baron's dad, Dann.

Pretty interesting... and now that you guys have brought it up, it IS kind of mysterious. I'm going to ask my friend for more info.

[AbbeyMadison]

For current fiction, probably A Suitable Boy by Vikram Seth (1474 pages long, at least in my paperback edition). But Journey to the West, Romance of the Three Kingdoms, Dream of the Red Chamber, and Outlaws of the Marsh were all longer. (And I read 900 to 1000+ page non-fiction all the time). I know this is miserly, but if books are too short I feel like I'm being ripped off.

Thanks for the recommendation, Abbey. I'll check it out. You're not a shill are you?

Haha - I totally agree with that! Unless the book was written by the masters (e.g. Fitzgerald), a short book is just not worth the time... which sounds ironic considering how much time a longer book takes...

Of the books listed above, which one was your favorite?


Well, I'm not getting anything on Amazon for that title, but I am getting all kinds of information about an Eagle Scout who has been coordinating work on this book.

Baron's Eagle project involved a 1,022-page fiction book titled 'Lamonga, River of the Seven Spirits.' He organized the writing, illustrators and publication. The project took three years and involved over 20 people.

http://www.news-leader.com/story/news/local/ozarks/2014/10/15/nixa-eagle-scout-earns-possible-badges/17142073/

He looks like a nice kid. What's the story here, Abbey?

P.s. Here's an about the author thing I found online. This is how it appears on the back flap of the book: http://www.cloverstonepublishing.com/books.html

[Pompey Bum]

Well, I'm not getting anything on Amazon for that title, but I am getting all kinds of information about an Eagle Scout who has been coordinating work on this book.

Baron's Eagle project involved a 1,022-page fiction book titled 'Lamonga, River of the Seven Spirits.' He organized the writing, illustrators and publication. The project took three years and involved over 20 people.

http://www.news-leader.com/story/news/local/ozarks/2014/10/15/nixa-eagle-scout-earns-possible-badges/17142073/

He looks like a nice kid. What's the story here, Abbey?


What's a "shill"...?

My friend knows some of the people involved in that huge boy scout project and apparently, the publishing company hasn't distributed it yet, which is why we can't find it on Amazon or for sale anywhere. Which makes me feel special because I got a sneak peek at the manuscript edition and I feel like this is going to be famous someday ^^ I actually went to summer camp with Baron a few years ago and although I didn't get to know him very well, he seemed pretty interesting, and I am not at all surprised he produced something like this.

According to the article (and to my friend) a team was assembled for the actual production of the book, but the story was written by Baron's dad, Dann.

Pretty interesting... and now that you guys have brought it up, it IS kind of mysterious. I'm going to ask my friend for more info.

Well it sure sounds like Spam to me, but okay, I'll let the administrators decide whether it qualifies. Just the same, I think I'll take a pass on the book. I mean, don't they give merit badges for integrity anymore?

[Lykren]

Longest single work I've read was the Jin Ping Mei, translated by Roy, at about 2,700 pages. But right now I'm reading the Enright revision of the first English translation of In Search of Lost Time, which is about 4,300 pages.

[Jackson Richardson]

I read A Suitable Boy when we took a railway journey to and from Cyprus a few years ago. I finished it on the way out and left it there with the friend we were visiting. He said he was doing a lot of travel and it would come in useful at airports. It is rather endearing, although if I didn't have five days enforced railway travel I might have been a bit fed up.

I've also read Proust in my time and Richardson's Clarissa, neither of which are good airport novels. I found Richardson on the train between London and Exeter hard going.

I don't intend to touch Ayn Rand with a barge pole, old fashioned leftie that I am, and I am grateful for Ian Sparrow confirming my judgement.

[Pompey Bum]

I read A Suitable Boy when we took a railway journey to and from Cyprus a few years ago.

Sounds like fun, but how did you manage that? Didn't the pages get soggy?


I finished it on the way out and left it there with the friend we were visiting. He said he was doing a lot of travel and it would come in useful at airports. It is rather endearing, although if I didn't have five days enforced railway travel I might have been a bit fed up.

I thought it was sweet and worthwhile if not terribly deep. And I loved the choice she made at the end. To me, A Suitable Boy was sort of Trollope-esque literature-- but not Dickens or Fielding by half. I'd recommend it to someone with a broken leg--or maybe a woman who finds herself pregnant. In fact, it would make a nice gift.

[YesNo]

Initially when I saw the title, I thought it referred to the physical size of the book including the cover.

I've looked through unabridged dictionaries in the good old days when these were in the library. They were probably the biggest books I've ever actually read or at least some entries in from time to time. I did see a huge bible once in a used book store. The cover was highly decorated and it looked bigger than those dictionaries. I didn't dare touch it and it was too high to reach anyway.

There are also some really, really huge books on art and photography that Taschen publishes. I remember glacing through some once wondering how would I carry them back to the car if I bought any. These are like coffee table books that are bigger than the coffee table.

[Clopin]

Ha, my local library has the twenty volume OED, a pretty huge book.

[YesNo]

Yeah, that's big also. I used to have access to a two volume edition with a magnifying glass at one library. It was a pain to use.

[mal4mac]

I'm reading The Arabian Nights at the moment, 2972 pages in the new three volume Penguin edition translated by Lyons. It's a good read; I'm half way through the first volume and it's like Ali Baba for grown ups (and the end of the first volume *is* Ali Baba for grown ups! Good incentive to keep going...) I'm finding it a lot easier and more exciting than Proust (which I gave up half way through...) The Kindle version is a bargain.

[YesNo]

I just now picked up a Kindle edition of the Arabian Nights (volume 1) translated by Poole that was originally published in the 19th century. It was free. Thanks for mentioning the book, mal4mac. I look at these more as a collection of stories rather than one big story needing thousands of pages. There was also a free Grimm's Fairy Tales.

I now remember enjoying Journey to the West. It was a big book, but it had many independent stories in it about the same characters. I didn't finish it, but I suppose I read over my 300 page tolerance limit.

[Pompey Bum]

For you Arabian Nights fans, or for any future takers, Gutenberg's got Richard Francis Burton's once notorious translation in 16 volumes for free (also his Kama Sutra for the real porno fans), and a lot of his travel writings, including his famous Pilgrimage to Mecca in three volumes. Burton is still controversial, but an interesting figure and fun to read (for me anyway).


I now remember enjoying Journey to the West. It was a big book, but it had many independent stories in it about the same characters. I didn't finish it, but I suppose I read over my 300 page tolerance limit.

If you finished the first 300 pages, then you read the funniest part (in my opinion), which is Sun Wu Kong's war against Heaven. Later, there is something numerological about the number of demons he slays on his journey, and it can seem like a lot, but his character (and some of the others) keep the story moving. It gets gets really amazing again at the end, when he and his companions reach the Western Heaven and find Buddha. I would definitely recommend slogging out the thousands of pages of the Anthony Yu translation. Don't settle for Waley's highly abridged Monkey. You have to take the Great Sage on his own terms.

[YesNo]

I found Burton's Kama Sutra on kindle for free. Now to see what I'm doing wrong.

[ennison]

What IS a shill? Sounds like a Yankee shank. If that's Abbey lipstickin' herself I'm ready to believe her .... Almost

[Clopin]

Well now I want to know what a Scottish 'shank' is supposed to be.

[ennison]

Well I'm assuming shill if it isn't Yiddish is Internet argot for someone who places fakish info on threads but it sounds like the word shiv which is a slang term for a home-made knife and in Lowland Scotland shank is a slang term for a knife blade carried by thugs. It is also used as a verb. Nasty sounding word for a nasty Scottish activity!

[Poetaster]

... wow. That's quite impressive! :)

It might sound impressive, but a part of my soul died with that book. And that class.

[Clopin]

Haha oh, well I knew that. A shill is someone who has an interest in promoting something (usually for financial gain), like a political party, religion, book, etc. It's well established that Putin and Israel, for example, have shills on internet message boards who promote their policies and agendas.

[mal4mac]

I just now picked up a Kindle edition of the Arabian Nights (volume 1) translated by Poole that was originally published in the 19th century. It was free.

I did consider ploughing through a free version, but decided to cough up the pittance for the bang up to date translation. It seemed like it would be easier going than the old translations, and it is proving to be (fairly) easy going. Lyons and Burton's translations are compared here:

http://www.theguardian.com/books/2008/dec/27/arabian-nights-malcolm-c-lyons

'Burton. Here is the old reprobate attacking a difficult passage in "The porter and the three ladies":

"Behold, there stood before him an honourable woman in a mantilla of Mosul [footnote] silk, broidered with gold and bordered with brocade; her walking shoes were also purfled with gold and her hair floated in long plaits. She raised her face veil [footnote] and, showing two black eyes fringed with jetty lashes, whose glances were soft and languishing and whose perfect beauty was ever blandishing, she accosted the Porter and said in the suavest tones and choicest language, 'Take up thy crate and follow me.'"

Here is the same passage in the Lyons' translation:

"A woman came up to him wrapped in a silken Mosuli shawl with a floating ribbon and wearing embroidered shoes fringed with gold thread. When she raised her veil, beneath it could be seen dark eyes, which, with their eyelashes and eyelids, shot soft glances, perfect in their quality. She turned to the porter and said in a sweet, clear voice: 'Take your basket and follow me.'"

The improvements are clear. The Biblical language in Burton, with its ludicrous echo of the Pool of Bethesda ("Take up thy crate") has gone, along with the superfluous Latinising ("mantilla" for shawl) and the faerie English ("purfled"). Gone too is any attempt to reproduce the Arabic rhyming prose known as saj ("broidered/bordered", "languishing/blandishing") and the prurient or speculative footnotes. The Lyons are clear as water at the expense of a very slight flatness ("perfect in their quality"). That flatness or evenness may be the Lyons' intention, for a reader can put by a dozen of these Nights in a night. The same cannot be said for Burton or Lane or even Galland.'

[Clopin]

I have Dawood's translation from the earlier, much more abridged, penguin release.

One day, as he sat in the market-place leaning idly against his basket, a young woman, dressed in rare silks and cloaked in a gold embroidered mantel of Mosul brocade, stopped before him and gently raised her veil. Beneath it there showed dark eyes with long lashes and lineaments of perfect beauty. 'Lift up your basket, porter,' she said in a sweet voice, 'and follow me.'

[YesNo]

It looks like I have the Edward William Lane translation. So there is an "Arabic rhyming prose known as saj". I'll have to look that up later.

Here is how Lane translates that paragraph:


There was a man of the city of Baghdad, who was unmarried, and he was a porter; and one day, as he sat in the market, reclining against his crate, there accosted him a female wrapped in an izar of the manufacture of El-Mosil, composed of gold-embroidered silk, with a border of gold lace at each end, who raised her face-veil, and displayed beneath it a pair of black eyes, with lids bordered by long lashes, exhibiting a tender expression, and features of perfect beauty; and she said, with a sweet voice, Bring thy crate, and follow me.

Being "accosted" by someone sounds strange, but the female seems quite attractive in this paragraph.

Just to bring this back to topic. Is the Arabian Nights a big book or a big book of little stories?

[Lykren]

My understanding is that The Thousand and One Nights refers to a particular frame story that has many nested stories common to each version, but also many that differ from compilation to compilation. How you interpret that is up to you - I like to think of it as more of a way of binding together stories that don't have anything to do with each other besides their common frame.

[Pierre Menard]

Of those translations, I actually like Burton's the best. But they're all pretty acceptable.

[Pompey Bum]

What IS a shill? Sounds like a Yankee shank.

From Urban Dictionary:

Shill: A person engaged in covert advertising. The shill attempts to spread buzz by personally endorsing the product in public forums with the pretense of sincerity, when in fact he is being paid for his services.

Who are you shilling for?

Ignore the n00b, he's just here to shill.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=shill

In addition to being a knife improvised from scrap metal (in prison slang), a shank is a cut of meat from an animal's limb (below the knee).


If that's Abbey lipstickin' herself I'm ready to believe her .... Almost

I think ol' Abbey may have finished her toilette and kissed us all goodbye.

[Pompey Bum]

Lyons and Burton's translations are compared here:

http://www.theguardian.com/books/2008/dec/27/arabian-nights-malcolm-c-lyons

'Burton. Here is the old reprobate attacking a difficult passage in "The porter and the three ladies":

"Behold, there stood before him an honourable woman in a mantilla of Mosul [footnote] silk, broidered with gold and bordered with brocade; her walking shoes were also purfled with gold and her hair floated in long plaits. She raised her face veil [footnote] and, showing two black eyes fringed with jetty lashes, whose glances were soft and languishing and whose perfect beauty was ever blandishing, she accosted the Porter and said in the suavest tones and choicest language, 'Take up thy crate and follow me.'"

Here is the same passage in the Lyons' translation:

"A woman came up to him wrapped in a silken Mosuli shawl with a floating ribbon and wearing embroidered shoes fringed with gold thread. When she raised her veil, beneath it could be seen dark eyes, which, with their eyelashes and eyelids, shot soft glances, perfect in their quality. She turned to the porter and said in a sweet, clear voice: 'Take your basket and follow me.'"

Burton. Hands down. If you want clear water, learn Arabic. Burton is Zeitgeist.

[mal4mac]

Burton does seem slightly more poetic than Lyons - but I thought 3000 pages of spurious Biblical language, superfluous Latinising, faerie English, outre synonyms, and speculative footnotes could get a bit wearing. But I stand to be corrected! Anyone read the whole of Burton? In any case, I'm more than happy with Lyons, his translation is so transparent that it's like reading a modern novel (by Iris Murdoch rather than James Joyce :)). But it''s much stranger, more exciting, and far more interesting, than any modern novel I've read. Truly a world classic!

What put me off Lane's translation is that he omitted stories through prudery, and his prose style is ponderous and sub-Biblical (even more so than Burton's!) - but he does have a reputation for accuracy, being the compiler of the still most highly rated Arabic-English dictionary (but given Lyons' credentials I can't imagine he's less accurate.)

Anyone encountered John Paynes translation? Burton is accused of following Payne a bit too closely - disguising his closeness by using outré synonyms and an expanding translation. He's also accused of exaggerating eroticism through unwarranted additions (isn't there enough already! :))

[Clopin]

I agree, for a book that long I would rather read the simpler translation.

[Clopin]

I think ol' Abbey may have finished her toilette and kissed us all goodbye.

Shucks, and I bought eleven copies of 'Lamonga: River of the Seven Spirits'

[Pompey Bum]

Burton does seem slightly more poetic than Lyons - but I thought 3000 pages of spurious Biblical language, superfluous Latinising, faerie English, outre synonyms, and speculative footnotes could get a bit wearing. But I stand to be corrected! Anyone read the whole of Burton? In any case, I'm more than happy with Lyons, his translation is so transparent that it's like reading a modern novel (by Iris Murdoch rather than James Joyce :)). But it''s much stranger, more exciting, and far more interesting, than any modern novel I've read. Truly a world classic!

What put me off Lane's translation is that he omitted stories through prudery, and his prose style is ponderous and sub-Biblical (even more so than Burton's!) - but he does have a reputation for accuracy, being the compiler of the still most highly rated Arabic-English dictionary (but given Lyons' credentials I can't imagine he's less accurate.)

Anyone encountered John Paynes translation? Burton is accused of following Payne a bit too closely - disguising his closeness by using outré synonyms and an expanding translation. He's also accused of exaggerating eroticism through unwarranted additions (isn't there enough already! :))

We're not trying to correct you, Mal. To each his own, right? :) I wouldn't assume that Burton's stylishly archaic language is "spurious[ly] Biblical" without understanding Arabic at least as well as he did (I'm not arguing for his accuracy of tone, by the way: I have no way of knowing). But the Arabian Nights in Arabic goes back to between the 8th and 10th centuries, so a modern English translation, while perhaps handy or simply preferable to some, is going to bound to be a distortion, too (whether or not Burton's is). So it comes down to what a reader is looking for, right?

I've read about a third of Burton's translation (until ebooks, I only had one volume of the three volume set!), usually a few stories at a time, over the course of maybe 30 years. Which brings me to my reason for not wanting an "easily readable" translation of the Nights. This is not a book to be read like a modern novel. It is a compilation of tales that even in the conceit of the present core of stories take years to tell. It may not have been meant to be read by the fire with a brandy (although I recommend it), but it wasn't intended to be read as a product of the modern publishing industry, either. Iris Murdoch it ain't. Like many Eastern classics (including the ones we were talking about before: Journey to the West, Romance of the Three Kingdoms, Outlaws of the Marsh), The Arabian Nights is a compilation of adventures to be read during a long period of one's life. I know it's difficult to do that with the kind of lives the 21st century requires of us (and I know that we're not all retired), but sometimes it's good when literature slows us down a bit. You could say the same thing for Don Quixote, right? Don't read it too fast.

Anyway, I love Burton's rich and stylish translation of the Arabian Nights. If his work has more to do with Victorian fantasies about the exotic East than the cultural realities of 9th century Baghdad, so much the better for me. It's a work of fantasy. Burton's. footnotes are gibberish of course, and not to be taken seriously. But like The Golden Bough or the White Goddess, they are also a lot of fun. Yes, they're racist and sexist. Burton was racist and sexist. So was Shakespeare. But anyone who gets a spear through his head and goes right on fighting should not be so quickly dismissed. :)

I guess that gets me to my other peeve about Burton bashing."Right thinking people" didn't like Burton in his own lifetime because he wouldn't kowtow to "the quality" (Speake et al.), and because he was an adventurer and (despite the K) not quite respectable. So they called him a pornographer and a crackpot, which in someways (given the standards of his day) he was, and in other ways he was not. "Right thinking people" today don't like him because he was an aggressive British imperialist, a white explorer in black Africa, and (in his old age at least) a vociferous and unrepentant racist. So they say that his translation of Arabian Nights is, whatever: sub-Biblical, superfluous, and outré--not to mention hard to read. :) Burton was, of course, a courageous man in some ways, and an utterly stupid one in others. I find him interesting, though some are repulsed. I once heard an interview with Charles Johnson (author of The Middle Passage), in which he said that he had modeled the despicable slave trader Falcon on Burton. Knowing that made Johnson's book more interesting to me. It also made the historical Burton more interesting, so I later read a (generally positive) biography. There's nothing like a considering different perspectives on a historical figure

And I guess that's my problem with Burton's new censors, the commissars of political correctness (that comment is not directed at you, by the way). Burton's translation is a standard. It is as rich, and engrossing, and attractive, and repellant as his dangerous and zany life was. But give me his dark waters over the clarity of a bland but acceptable translation. Burton was never about acceptability. And I am more than capable of sorting his right from wrong. In the meantime, give me the ape, the Sultan's daughter, and another brandy. :)

[mal4mac]

... my reason for not wanting an "easily readable" translation of the Nights. This is not a book to be read like a modern novel. It is a compilation of tales that even in the conceit of the present core of stories take years to tell... Iris Murdoch it ain't. Like many Eastern classics (including the ones we were talking about before: Journey to the West, Romance of the Three Kingdoms, Outlaws of the Marsh), The Arabian Nights is a compilation of adventures to be read during a long period of one's life... You could say the same thing for Don Quixote, right? Don't read it too fast.

I agree with 'taking it slow'. I aim to read one tale a night - can you argue against that (!?) Sometimes I couldn't resist reading on. I've been averaging about two a night since November. I don't think this is an argument against readable translations though. I gave up on an older translation of Don Quixote, but read (slowly) through Edith Grossman's translation with great enjoyment.


... Burton's translation is a standard. It is as rich, and engrossing, and attractive, and repellant as his dangerous and zany life was. But give me his dark waters over the clarity of a bland but acceptable translation. Burton was never about acceptability. And I am more than capable of sorting his right from wrong. In the meantime, give me the ape, the Sultan's daughter, and another brandy. :)

Here's something from Robert Irwin, the eminence gris behind Lyon's translation:

http://www.todayszaman.com/news-211315-110-latest-translation-breathes-new-life-into-classic-arabian-nights.html

Key points:

"The previous translations are utterly unsatisfactory. Edward William Lane’s 1838-41 was highly selective, bowdlerized and written in a mock biblical prose, as well as being overladen with notes. Sir Richard Burton’s, 1885-8, was error-strewn, sexist, racist, imperialist and, above all, composed in a bizarre English, which drew on medieval, Tudor and Jacobean vocabulary, as well as Victorian slang. Also he liked to invert the word order to make the text look archaic. It verges on the unreadable. Indeed it is sometimes worse than verging on the unreadable. Because these translations were so bad, the popularity of the Nights actually declined in the course of the 19th century. A scholarly translation into good English was a stark necessity. I am very proud of having engineered such a thing."

"Burton had believed that it was his duty to make the text seem strange and barbarous. This was both mistaken and patronizing. The Arabs were capable of writing better prose and poetry than Burton was."

"I am certain that from the early 18th century onwards, the Nights exercised a greater influence on Western literature than any other book, the Bible excepted. Its influence on fantasy is obvious. What is less obvious is that in the 18th century the “Nights” exercised a crucial influence on the origins and development of the realistic novel in Britain and France."

"I hope that most readers will read the stories for pleasure, for their literary and imaginative qualities. These stories should not be used as a primer on Middle Eastern realities."

P.S. it was through Galland's French translation, and an anonymous grub street translator between 1705 and 1721, that we got the translation that inspired most of the great British writers from from Addison to Dickens. This is perhaps (?) now most easily accessed through Arabian Nights' Entertainments (Oxford World's Classics) Paperback – Robert L. Mack (Editor)

[YesNo]

I'm trying to put together these big books of little stories that I've missed.

Journey to the West (I've read some of it)
Arabian Nights
Grimm's Fairy Tales (Disney probably doesn't count)
Romance of the Three Kingdoms
Outlaws of the Marsh
The Bhagavatam (I don't know if this fits, but it seems like a collection of stories from what I've read)

Are there any others?

Regarding the Arabian Nights, I am finding the stories enchanting. The jinns and jinnettes (or whatever the female jinn is called) are delightfully moronic in response to the sober humans who made some mistake and now are caught in their spell.

[Pompey Bum]

Sir Richard Burton’s, 1885-8, was error-strewn, sexist, racist, imperialist and, above all, composed in a bizarre English, which drew on medieval, Tudor and Jacobean vocabulary, as well as Victorian slang.

Heh heh. Yeah, well like I was saying. But no matter. I hope you enjoy whichever translation you choose as much as many of us have relished Burton over the years. :)

[Pompey Bum]

I'm trying to put together these big books of little stories that I've missed.

Journey to the West (I've read some of it)
Arabian Nights
Grimm's Fairy Tales (Disney probably doesn't count)
Romance of the Three Kingdoms
Outlaws of the Marsh
The Bhagavatam (I don't know if this fits, but it seems like a collection of stories from what I've read)

Are there any others?

Regarding the Arabian Nights, I am finding the stories enchanting. The jinns and jinnettes (or whatever the female jinn is called) are delightfully moronic in response to the sober humans who made some mistake and now are caught in their spell.

Yeah, the jinns are a riot. :)

The Chinese classics manage to be both little and huge stories. The have macro-plots and macro-characterization, as well as vignette-style micro-action. But they are truly enormous works and, as I suggested to Mal, they should not be read like western novels. The Romance of the Three Kingdoms (which is about the getting and execution of power--honorable and otherwise) is something to be read over many years, as one is developing one's own ideas about what it means to compete and contend with one's fellow man. You can read it as a really long novel--a kind of Chinese King Arthur-- but that is almost beside the point. One is meant to emerge from the experience of reading it a changed person, beyond what "reading a book" (other than the Bible) is supposed to do for you in the Western sense.

By the way, Y/N, knowing you a little (in that weird cyber way), I think that you would like Journey to the West or Outlaws of the Marsh (about war, but with some magic thrown in) more than The Romance of the Three Kingdoms, which is about war, war, war. But who knows? They are all worth taking the time to read.

EDIT: As far as other suggestions go, I've never read it, but there is always Rabelais' Gargantua and of Pantagruel. Has anyone read it yet?

[ennison]

Thanks for that PB. Probably connected to the meaning of "shank of mutton" I believe there is another slang use of the word to denote a woman who has seen better days but has not yet realized it. It's the kind of word used by men who are no gentlemen and probably (like Socrates) not great lookers themselves.

[Pompey Bum]

I think that's a skank.

Do you think Abbey and Baron are the same person?

[mal4mac]

Grimm's Fairy Tales


Great! But it's quite short, only about three hundred pages. :)

Other big books, I've enjoyed:

Burton's Anatomy of Melancholy - it's a riot!

Montaigne's complete Essays - Screech's Penguin translation is excellent but there's an interesting Kindle freebie - Cotton's (1630-87) translation reissued and revised by Hazlitt - or could try and seek out Florio's version if you want to read what Shakespeare was reading.

Schopenhauer's essays - two large volumes

Gogol's Tales - not to be missed, totally weird

[Lykren]

How someone can get anything out of The Romance of the Three Kingdoms in its English translation (I'm sure the original must be better) will probably remain a life-long mystery to me (but I hope not - I hope I can one day realize why Pompey Bum relates to it!). I thought it was duller than reading the dictionary; battle after battle after battle, each one of them identical as far as I could tell. The very occasional vignette I did find to liven up the story, but those got rarer and rarer as the story progressed.

Your point, Pompey Bum, about emerging from the reading experience a changed person is also totally lost on me - but again, I wish I could understand! For me reading a book has changed nothing but my opinion of that book. Reading is, I think, a bizarre and fantastically varied pleasure, which long stories like the Jin Ping Mei (which also had its boring bits from my perspective, but much less often than ROTK) seem to offer up with paradoxical continuity amidst the ceaseless changes of life, but never have I felt that my perspective on life itself, or on myself, or on other people has shifted one iota as a result of reading a novel, poem, or play. Is it just me?

[Clopin]

Oh I disagree Lykren. I was just watching the beginning of the documentary on Jodorowsky's 'Dune' mishap on netflix, and he said something like 'the purpose of human endeavour in life lies in crafting yourself a soul'; and I don't know if he meant it how I took it exactly, but it seems to me that there's nothing like books for 'crafting' a soul for yourself.

[Lykren]

I'm not saying other people don't have the experience of, as you put it, 'crafting a soul' from literature (or any other art), just that I haven't.

[Clopin]

Well maybe you just haven't noticed. It's hard to track gradual change over many years.

[Clopin]

Scott Fitzgerald said that one of the chiefest benefits to be found in reading literature is the discovery that you're not alone, that other people have had the same thoughts and feelings as you, or the same struggles, etc. It seems important to me to experience that as much as possible.

[Pompey Bum]

How someone can get anything out of The Romance of the Three Kingdoms in its English translation (I'm sure the original must be better) will probably remain a life-long mystery to me (but I hope not - I hope I can one day realize why Pompey Bum relates to it!). I thought it was duller than reading the dictionary; battle after battle after battle, each one of them identical as far as I could tell. The very occasional vignette I did find to liven up the story, but those got rarer and rarer as the story progressed.

Your point, Pompey Bum, about emerging from the reading experience a changed person is also totally lost on me - but again, I wish I could understand! For me reading a book has changed nothing but my opinion of that book. Reading is, I think, a bizarre and fantastically varied pleasure, which long stories like the Jin Ping Mei (which also had its boring bits from my perspective, but much less often than ROTK) seem to offer up with paradoxical continuity amidst the ceaseless changes of life, but never have I felt that my perspective on life itself, or on myself, or on other people has shifted one iota as a result of reading a novel, poem, or play. Is it just me?

I have no doubt that you are correct about the language. But I suspect you found the book so interminable for precisely the reasons I mentioned above. It just cannot be read as a product of the Western publishing business--or of the Cervantes-Fielding-Dickens novel tradition, for that matter. There was one indistinguishable (to you) battle after another because good time--or at least lengthy reflection--was needed in between between them. The events and characters (down to some of the horses) are already known to even relatively uneducated Easterners, so suspense and denouement are not the driving forces. In fact, if you read The Romance of the Three Kingdoms in that way, it's even worse than you say. The battles at least clear the air a little. But between them there are usually lengthy and often static dialogues about power relationships as they pertain to the unfolding events. And that's hardly video game material, as you know if you gave it a shot.

By the way, I am not sure that I will agree with you that I "relate to" the book--again not in the standard Western sense. I like it, and I loved the times when I was reading it (and new to the Far East), and okay, I have my Cao Cao moments (:)), but a lot of the growth I took from it in those days came from rejecting some of the book's ideas. That is why I recommended that Yes/No read Journey to the West instead, since it has a lot of esoteric religion/philosophy (which he digs) in it. Three Kingdoms is about another kind of power--much less appealing to both of us, I think.

But Journey to the West requires a similar approach. The war with Heaven actually can be read as a single (hilarious) unit, but once the demon bashing begins, it's the same (for many readers) as the battles in Three Kingdoms. And unless you are actually getting the Three Teachings approach the author uses, and the allegory of Buddhist spiritual development that pervades it--and considering their implications in your own world--you may have some tough sledding on your way to the Western Heaven. It's meant to be an actual inner journey--maybe that's the best way to look at it. But it is so worth it. Journey to the West is a book I relate to far more than Three Kingdoms. But that's a terrible confession. Sun Wukong and Zhu Bajie are horribly flawed characters--demons, in fact. Journey to the West is the story of how a demon monkey with ADHD (and superpowers) can obtain enlightenment. How could anyone fail to relate to that. :)

[YesNo]

Great! But it's quite short, only about three hundred pages. :)

Other big books, I've enjoyed:

Burton's Anatomy of Melancholy - it's a riot!

Montaigne's complete Essays - Screech's Penguin translation is excellent but there's an interesting Kindle freebie - Cotton's (1630-87) translation reissued and revised by Hazlitt - or could try and seek out Florio's version if you want to read what Shakespeare was reading.

Schopenhauer's essays - two large volumes

Gogol's Tales - not to be missed, totally weird

Ah, only three hundred pages. There is a chance I might actually finish that one.

Thanks for the recommendations. It occurs to me there must be quite a few of these collections if one includes essays. I wonder if Ovid's Metamorphoses would be included even though it is in verse.

[Pompey Bum]

never have I felt that my perspective on life itself, or on myself, or on other people has shifted one iota as a result of reading a novel, poem, or play. Is it just me?

To hack Nietzsche, when you look into a book, the book looks into you. :)

[Lykren]

Well, maybe I'll give ROTK another try. Maybe. In thirty years. :)

The thing is that I don't usually have a problem with books outside the Western tradition (though it's hard to say how outside the tradition they are after they've been translated into English). Jin Ping Mei, as I mentioned, but also The Tale of Genji, which is one of my favorite books. But those are books with very different attitudes (especially Genji) than ROTK. I think I have a problem with reading about war, actually. It's not that it disgusts me, but I think it's pointless and an utterly unremarkable, unexciting thing to hear about. It's actually really the only time I'll say that content trumps form in importance for me.

For example, War & Peace. You already know I didn't care for the historiographical speculation at all :) but barely better than those were for me the descriptions of movements of armies and battles. I could tell he was doing it well, he's Tolstoy! But it was something I couldn't relate to even abstractly. I don't even have contempt for the warlike spirit, just a complete lack of comprehension.

Now, I realize all this is merely a listing-off of my weaknesses as a reader. Anyways, I'll move Journey to the West (Anthony Wu's version, not Waley's) up on my list. Thanks for the advice, Pompey.

[YesNo]

But Journey to the West requires a similar approach. The war with Heaven actually can be read as a single (hilarious) unit, but once the demon bashing begins, it's the same (for many readers) as the battles in Three Kingdoms. And unless you are actually getting the Three Traditions approach it uses, and the allegory of Buddhist spiritual development that pervades it--and considering their implications in your own world--you may have some tough sledding on your way to the Western Heaven. It's meant to be an actual inner journey--maybe that's the best way to look at it. But it is so worth it. Journey to the West is a book I relate to far more than Three Kingdoms. But that's a terrible confession. Sun Wukong and Zhu Bajie are horribly flawed characters--demons, in fact. Journey to the West is the story of how a demon monkey with ADHD (and superpowers) can obtain enlightenment. How could anyone fail to relate to that. :)

I liked Sun Wukong, the super monkey, as well, even with ADHD. The Buddhist monk trying to get the scriptures from the West to bring them back home didn't interest me as much, but he was critical to the plot. If I remember correctly, if you eat him you live forever and the monkey and his other companies had to try to protect him.

The best story was only a few pages and was about Sun Wukong bragging that he could get out of the hand of God. He tried. He raced away and urinated on some pillars far away from the hand of God. When he got back and started bragging about his feat, he saw that God's fingers were wet with his urine.

There was too much fighting in the book, but what else are you going to have them do? In the end, I stopped reading. I've stopped reading many books. They must deliver which means they must make a difference to me, keep my interest and make me think about them. If they do that, I may even reread choice parts again--and again.

[Pompey Bum]

Well, maybe I'll give ROTK another try. Maybe. In thirty years. :) Anyways, I'll move Journey to the West (Anthony Wu's version, not Waley's) up on my list. Thanks for the advice, Pompey.

Later in life may not be such a bad idea. It sort of needs to be the right time with that kind of book.

But important news flash: I hit the wrong key before. The translation of Journey to the West that you want is by Anthony Yu, not Anthony Wu. I seldom say this about any book, but if you only read the first volume (at least for now), you'll love it.

[Lykren]

Anthony Yu it is! The work of the little-known translator of Chinese literature 'Anthony Wu' has been relegated to the dust heap of 'never written, never read.' ;)

[ashulman]

I assume proust counts. It's no contest for me. Largest single volume was probably pynchons against the day

[Pompey Bum]

I liked Sun Wukong, the super monkey, as well, even with ADHD. The Buddhist monk trying to get the scriptures from the West to bring them back home didn't interest me as much, but he was critical to the plot.

Oh I kind of like him. He's what they used to call a square--timid and prudish and secretly sort of a coward. So he's a good foil to Sun Wukong's fearlessness and recklessness. In fact, in the psychological/spiritual allegory, they are two aspects of the same person. As the journey progresses the author draws their character development closer and closer together. And it becomes clear that they both would have been killed a thousand times over if it hadn't been for Tang Xuanzang's caution and Sun Wukong's audacity. There's a moving scene near the end in which Tang Xuanzang tries to say as much to Sun Wukong and thank him, but Sun Wukong stops him, saying that there is no need: "for we are one." It's a nice moment.


If I remember correctly, if you eat him you live forever and the monkey and his other companies had to try to protect him.

Yes, because he's the reincarnation of one of the Buddha's original disciples, which makes him extra yummy. There are a lot of references to cannibalism in Journey to the West, because the author is trying to make the reader think about what it really means to eat meat. But he doesn't knock you over the head with it. Instead he uses comical predicaments like Tang Xuanzang's ontological deliciousness. On the one hand Journey to the West has all this over-the-top comedy in it, but there is a psychological and spiritual allegory at work throughout. Personally I think it's one of the greatest things ever written.

[YesNo]

I agree. The Journey to the West is a great book. The "we are one" is a nice way to end that journey.

[tonywalt]

'history of the american people' by paul johnson 1104 PAGES - also read 'war and peace'

[Clopin]

How is History of the American People? I read Modern Times by Johnson and thought it was decent and then read Intellectuals and thought it was only meh.

[mona amon]

1. Atlas Shrugged - 1088 pages - It's on Wikipedia's list of longest novels, but it didn't seem very long to me, except for the radio speech at the end which went on forever and I think I skipped most of it.
2. The Tale of Genji - 1182 pages - I skipped all the chapters after the protagonist's abrupt disappearance from the novel the first time, but read the whole thing when I did a second reading. Beautiful book.
3. War and Peace - 1302 pages - Never boring but it was BIG.
4. Don Quixote - 1050 pages - So fast paced and exuberant I didn't notice the length.
5. Morte D'Arthur - Don't know how many pages but a lot of it was so tedious I felt it was the longest book I'd ever read! I should have been content with the kiddies version I read when I was a child.
6. Les Miserables - 1488 pages - I did skip a bit, including the whole chapter on the Paris sewage system.

My favourites are Genji and Don Quixote.

[Lykren]

2. The Tale of Genji - 1182 pages - I skipped all the chapters after the protagonist's abrupt disappearance from the novel the first time, but read the whole thing when I did a second reading. Beautiful book.

Yeah the chapters you skipped the first time around are probably the best in the whole book. I actually quite like it, in general, when a book's ending takes a turn I didn't expect, such as following the characters long after the protagonist's death. It makes me question the values I've been imposing on the characters and scenes the whole time. This is especially true considering Genji's theme of material impermanence - what better way to strike that idea home than with that ending?

[mona amon]

Hi Lykren!

I didn't see any change in the quality of the writing, in fact if I remember correctly, it took me a while to realize that Genji was gone from the book forever, but my first readings are usually rapid, without time to savour the details (which is why I almost always reread books that I love) and I was so charmed by Genji and interested in what he was doing that without him the impelling force seemed to have gone. Second time I just kept going and didn't want it to end! Anyway, I think these days we do not read these huge old books the way the original readers would have read them - in installments most likely, and without being impatient to finish and get started on the next great book on the to-read list. Even the actual ending of the Tale is very abrupt, as if the author could have added more chapters if and when she felt inclined.

[R.F. Schiller]

Oh I kind of like him. He's what they used to call a square--timid and prudish and secretly sort of a coward. So he's a good foil to Sun Wukong's fearlessness and recklessness. In fact, in the psychological/spiritual allegory, they are two aspects of the same person. As the journey progresses the author draws their character development closer and closer together. And it becomes clear that they both would have been killed a thousand times over if it hadn't been for Tang Xuanzang's caution and Sun Wukong's audacity. There's a moving scene near the end in which Tang Xuanzang tries to say as much to Sun Wukong and thank him, but Sun Wukong stops him, saying that there is no need: "for we are one." It's a nice moment.

Well, technically Sun Wukong cannot die - he ate golden elixir pills, those peaches and scares the **** out of the King of the Underworld, who would not dare touch him. Also, I don't see Xuanzang as saving Wukong from any external disasters at all, in fact, it is his stupidity and naivety that causes many of their hardships (not recognizing demons and not trusting Wukong's abilities). Wukong's aggressive, reckless behaviour causes far less external problems (the ginseng fruit episode was one of them) in comparison to Xuanzang. What Xuanzang DOES offer Wukong is restraint, compassion and spiritual development. This can be seen as in earlier episodes, Wukong ruthlessly kills bandits (ex. when he first becomes a disciple and then right before the episode where he meets a double Sun Wukong) both resulting Xuanzang scolding him/reciting the band tightening spell causing him to leave, but as they move west, we see a much more compassionate, understanding Monkey. In the last episode involving bandits who rob Squire Kou and threaten the protagonists, Sun Wukong merely freezes them, questions them and lets them go.

I do believe that Monkey and Xuanzang are allegorical in the sense that they are parts of a whole - but in conjuction with Pig, Sandy and even the Dragon Horse. Some scholars believe they represent the five elements of ancient China: Fire (Monkey), Earth (Xuanzang), Water (Dragon Horse), Wood (Pig) and Metal (Sandy). The fact that Monkey represents fire is why he struggles to fight in water. Wood and Metal both float therefore Pig and Sandy are more capable there. The Dragon Horse is obviously skilled in water and Xuanzang being earth explains why he always sinks - captured by water demons.

In terms of a whole, Xuanzang represents the spiritual, Monkey perhaps the pragmatic & capable, and Pig the human vices (lust, laziness, gluttony). I haven't really thought about Sandy and the Dragon Horse yet.

I thought for the longest time that Journey to the West, was easily the weakest of the Four Great Classical Novels, feeling too much like a children's nursery book, but I'm starting to enjoy it more as I read it critically. There's extensive allegory, philosophy, mythology and religion involved. I think the child-like aspect of the novel becomes overblown by pop culture - it is the classical novel that is easily most relatable to younger children, so there are extensive children's versions, cartoons etc. in China. As much as I enjoyed the classic 1986 TV Series, it really eliminated most of the philosophical/allegorical side and adapted the novel into something too child-like. I just read an article investigating the criticism of Taoism in the book. Taoists were abandoning much of the philosophy during the time and began delving in alchemy. The story in Journey to the West involving the sick king believing that he would get well by eating 100(?) baby hearts actually occurred in the Ming(?) Dynasty as well with an emperor, with Taoists advising him.

[R.F. Schiller]

How someone can get anything out of The Romance of the Three Kingdoms in its English translation (I'm sure the original must be better) will probably remain a life-long mystery to me (but I hope not - I hope I can one day realize why Pompey Bum relates to it!). I thought it was duller than reading the dictionary; battle after battle after battle, each one of them identical as far as I could tell. The very occasional vignette I did find to liven up the story, but those got rarer and rarer as the story progressed.

Your point, Pompey Bum, about emerging from the reading experience a changed person is also totally lost on me - but again, I wish I could understand! For me reading a book has changed nothing but my opinion of that book. Reading is, I think, a bizarre and fantastically varied pleasure, which long stories like the Jin Ping Mei (which also had its boring bits from my perspective, but much less often than ROTK) seem to offer up with paradoxical continuity amidst the ceaseless changes of life, but never have I felt that my perspective on life itself, or on myself, or on other people has shifted one iota as a result of reading a novel, poem, or play. Is it just me?

I've read both the English and Chinese versions (born in China, later immigrated to Canada) so maybe I can offer some insight. The novel itself, as you said, can be quite tedious as it sounds much like a history textbook for many chapters. The book is much nicer in Chinese because the writing and dialogue in many sections is very beautiful. The poems in Chinese are quite nice too.

The English version loses much of the beautiful prose, but the loss of the beautiful language is only one part. ROTK has so much significance in Chinese culture that transcends the novel itself - much like the Bible in the West. So many common things we say like "Doubting Thomas" come from the bible. When we refer to someone as "Judas" everyone knows we calling someone a traitor or when we call someone "Samson", everyone knows we are calling someone strong. We use phrases like "David and Goliath" (especially in sports) to refer to a situation where one party is a massive underdog. Then we have characters like Abraham and of course, Jesus who we are supposed to emulate.

It's the same with ROTK in China. Phrases like "Empty City Ruse" have entered the Chinese language to meant that someone is bluffing hard. A reference to "Zhuge Liang" immediately triggers the word intelligence and "Cao Cao" the word "traitor" or perhaps "cunning". Diao Chan is placed as one of the four most beautiful women in Chinese history (along with real women like Xi Shi), even though she did not exist (!) in real life, simply because of this novel. Then there are heroes like Guan Yu, who is now idolized as the God of War (and was worshiped by groups of people for a while). Lord Guan, particularly in the section where he serves under Cao Cao, but still only thinks of Liu Bei, displays the perfect Confucian (it is no coincidence that Guan Yu is said to have been very well versed in Spring and Autumn in the novel) values of "Zhong Yi" (Loyalty and Honour), which is supposed to emulated.

Much of the novel gives clear examples of how to rule effectively (Liu Bei) and how not to (Yuan Shao/Dong Zhuo etc.), how to be a good subordinate (this is incredibly clear with Huang Zhong and Wei Yan, who are both tied to the same story). It is also seen as a narrative add-on to famous military manuals like Sun Tzu's The Art of War or The Thirty-Six Stratagems, where many of the principles/concepts are applied directly.

So basically, besides being entertaining/historically relevant, much of it's significance comes from the fact that 1) so much of it is ingrained in Chinese culture 2) It contains many core Confucian values 3) it is seen as a political manual (rule, wage war etc.).

As a Westerner, I can definitely see why it may seem dry/tedious with unemotional, flat characters in comparison to other Chinese novels like The Dream of Red Mansions. Some sections are definitely better than others - particularly the Red Cliff section IMO. After the death of Zhuge Liang, the novel basically dries up.

Curious, which translation did you read? I originally read a random Wade-Giles one that was quite mediocre. The Moss Roberts one that I read recently was much, much better.

[JBI]

Three kingdoms is supposed to be performed, not read. That's the biggest problem. As individual episodes they make great puppet shows and dramas. The problem is the narrative was rewritten by Mao Zonggang after the Ming-Qing transition to reflect "Moral" themes of righteousness, loyalty, etc. And therefore the book lost much of its original dramatic flare, and oral traits and became more a book of preachy lessons.

That being said, I don't care for the text, but it is very relevant for everyone who wishes to understand a sort of people-level Chinese culture, the same way that Genji represents the scholarly tradition of Japanese literature, and Heike represents the common, or vernacular culture, so too is there a discrepency between something like Three Kingdoms and the more sophisticated works of later fiction, such as Red Chamber, or The Scholars which have never been popular amongst commoners.

[Lykren]

I read Moss Roberts'. There's a new one that came out recently by Yu Sumei. That might be the one I try next time around.

It relieves me for some reason to learn that the prose and poems in the original really are much more beautiful. As for being sensitive to the cultural influence the novel has had, I've heard that a number of times in reference to ROTK, but can't say I understand the analogy to the bible (which I have also heard before). That is to say, when I read the Torah I didn't think my prior knowledge of the stories enhanced my pleasure when reading the actual thing.

JBI, I've never heard of The Scholars before. Does it come across well in translation? Do you think I would enjoy it (preferring as I do Red Chamber to Three Kingdoms, Genji to Heike)?

[grigioverde]

L'Adone of Giambattista Marino.

[Pompey Bum]

Hello Mr. Schiller. I don't think we've had a chance to talk before, but I've enjoyed (and learned from) several of your earlier posts. Thanks.


Well, technically Sun Wukong cannot die - he ate golden elixir pills, those peaches and scares the **** out of the King of the Underworld, who would not dare touch him. Also, I don't see Xuanzang as saving Wukong from any external disasters at all, in fact, it is his stupidity and naivety that causes many of their hardships (not recognizing demons and not trusting Wukong's abilities). Wukong's aggressive, reckless behaviour causes far less external problems (the ginseng fruit episode was one of them) in comparison to Xuanzang. What Xuanzang DOES offer Wukong is restraint, compassion and spiritual development. This can be seen as in earlier episodes, Wukong ruthlessly kills bandits (ex. when he first becomes a disciple and then right before the episode where he meets a double Sun Wukong) both resulting Xuanzang scolding him/reciting the band tightening spell causing him to leave, but as they move west, we see a much more compassionate, understanding Monkey. In the last episode involving bandits who rob Squire Kou and threaten the protagonists, Sun Wukong merely freezes them, questions them and lets them go.

Well, technically the pills and peaches (plus his education) only give Sun Wukong extreme longevity, but yes, he has the king of hell completely intimidated with his manic roughhousing and has personally crossed his own name off the rolls of the dead. His body has also been tempered like metal in the flames of Lao-tze's furnace. It's an open question, though, whether a nasty enough demon could annihilate him. After all, Lao-tze threw him in the furnace in the first place because he thought it was at least theoretically possible to reduce him to elements and get his elixir pills back. Still I wouldn't mess with him.

Immortality really isn't the point, though, because in Sun Wukong's world there are worse things than dying, as he finds out when he tries to take on the Buddha at the end of his war with Heaven. But it is exactly that kind of "monkey mind" arrogance that Tang Xuanzang weans him from through the headband that Guanyin gives him, but also by modeling self-restraint. Xuanzang is no fighter, but over time he makes Sun Wukong less self-destructive, and furthers the success of their mission by making him (as you point out in your examples of the bandits) less destructive in general. The combination of this new-and-improved Great Sage Equaling Heaven and a somewhat less chickensh*t Tripitika (as both approach enlightenment) is what sustains their mission to the end. That is what I was trying to express to Yes/No. Neither would have made it without the other.


I do believe that Monkey and Xuanzang are allegorical in the sense that they are parts of a whole - but in conjuction with Pig, Sandy and even the Dragon Horse. Some scholars believe they represent the five elements of ancient China: Fire (Monkey), Earth (Xuanzang), Water (Dragon Horse), Wood (Pig) and Metal (Sandy). The fact that Monkey represents fire is why he struggles to fight in water. Wood and Metal both float therefore Pig and Sandy are more capable there. The Dragon Horse is obviously skilled in water and Xuanzang being earth explains why he always sinks - captured by water demons.

There are certainly some esoteric aspects to the story. I don't know enough about Taoist and "Three Teachings" traditions to understand them intuitively, but there is something going on with numerology and the demons the party confronts; and with elemental alchemy (if that's the right term for what you are describing) and the characters in the party. More about this was explained than (by me) understood at the beginning of the book, but I remember that the five elements were important to the stone egg from which Sun Wukong emerged in the first chapter (which also featured a bewildering explanation of Taoist numerology). And speaking of things I don't understand, it may be worth noting that monkey, pig, horse, and dragon are all featured in the Chinese zodiac.

I also understand what you are saying about all five of the pilgrims constituting a kind of whole, although I see a special mirror (Yin-Yang?) relationship between Sun Wukong and Tang Xuanzang, who alone achieve Buddhahood. I talk more about it below.


In terms of a whole, Xuanzang represents the spiritual, Monkey perhaps the pragmatic & capable, and Pig the human vices (lust, laziness, gluttony). I haven't really thought about Sandy and the Dragon Horse yet.

Beyond the elemental aspect of the characters, and the many other dimensions of Journey to the West, I suspect that the book once had a kind of Sitz im Leben as popular though didactic literature for aspiring monks, in which several types of "problem monks" resolve their difficulties with varying degrees of effectiveness. Tang Xuanzang is the spiritually mature monk who struggles comically in a world dominated by less than holy powers--and ultimately can't take care of himself. Sun Wukong, his opposite (but "secret sharer)," is characterized by genius untempered by maturity. He has the innocent arrogance--even violence--of an out of control child. His slaughter of the bandits, for example, far from being "ruthless" to him is a merry lark. "I killed 'em, Master!" he happily tells a shocked Xuanzang, who has the spiritual maturity to know that killing is wrong (but who would have been killed by the bandits if Sun Wukong had not done something).

Against Sun Wukong's merely misdirected genius, Zhu Baijie is presented as the worst monk of all. He is a slave of gluttony and libido, and significantly does not obtain enlightenment. The point seems to the monastic reader seems to be that it is preferable to do wrong in an innocent or immature way than in a selfish and debauched one. In fact, as Sun Wukong grows spiritually, Zhu Baijie often becomes the butt of his jibes; he frequently refers to him simply as baichi, the idiot (as does the narrator!)

From this instructional/didactic perspective, I see Sha Wujing as midway between the two. On one level he seems like a patiently suffering if somewhat self-loathing penitent. On a closer look, while he lacks Zhu Baijie's hedonism, he also lacks Sun Wukong's wild genius. He's boring. And he's not good for much besides carrying the luggage, which unlike Zhu Baijie he does without complaining. It's odd that a wayward officer of the Jade Emperor's host (and a badass cannibalistic water demon for a while) turned out to be such a non-entity as a monk. He's staunch and all, and spiritually speaking he's headed in the right direction, but there seems to be something missing.

And then there's the horse. The horse gets to be a naga. Naga's are cool, but if the Buddha's security guard Mucalinda is anyone to go by, his enlightenment lies in another lifetime, too.

So from an instructional perspective, the point seems to be that "monkey mind" and devout helplessness can cancel each other out with sufficient spiritual direction, but other penitents may have further to go in their search for enlightenment. The didactic aspect of the story, however, is just one of many levels (esoteric Taoist, allegorical Buddhist, adventure, fantasy, comedy, etc.) on which it works.


I thought for the longest time that Journey to the West, was easily the weakest of the Four Great Classical Novels, feeling too much like a children's nursery book, but I'm starting to enjoy it more as I read it critically. There's extensive allegory, philosophy, mythology and religion involved. I think the child-like aspect of the novel becomes overblown by pop culture - it is the classical novel that is easily most relatable to younger children, so there are extensive children's versions, cartoons etc. in China. As much as I enjoyed the classic 1986 TV Series, it really eliminated most of the philosophical/allegorical side and adapted the novel into something too child-like.

Yes, the Bible's the same way. If you can free yourself of the well intended brainwashing of childhood, it's actually a meaningful and moving text. Maybe what we need is a Sun Wukong to slay the demon of Orthodoxy (but I suppose that's for another thread).

[entropic island]

Infinite Jest, though it didn't feel that long because of the style.

[R.F. Schiller]

Three kingdoms is supposed to be performed, not read. That's the biggest problem. As individual episodes they make great puppet shows and dramas. The problem is the narrative was rewritten by Mao Zonggang after the Ming-Qing transition to reflect "Moral" themes of righteousness, loyalty, etc. And therefore the book lost much of its original dramatic flare, and oral traits and became more a book of preachy lessons.

That being said, I don't care for the text, but it is very relevant for everyone who wishes to understand a sort of people-level Chinese culture, the same way that Genji represents the scholarly tradition of Japanese literature, and Heike represents the common, or vernacular culture, so too is there a discrepency between something like Three Kingdoms and the more sophisticated works of later fiction, such as Red Chamber, or The Scholars which have never been popular amongst commoners.

A little OT, but JBI, do you have any idea why Penguin chose "The Story of the Stone" as the title for the translation? I mean I have no idea how they got that from 红楼梦.

[Lykren]

I'm not JBI, but... from Wikipedia:

"In 1791, Gao E and Cheng Weiyuan brought together the novel's first printed edition. This was also the first "complete" edition of The Story of the Stone, which they printed as Dream of the Red Chamber (繡像紅樓夢)."

So the printers were the ones who called it 繡像紅樓夢 or, now, 红楼梦. The title of the manuscript version must have been 石头记.

[R.F. Schiller]

I'm not JBI, but... from Wikipedia:

"In 1791, Gao E and Cheng Weiyuan brought together the novel's first printed edition. This was also the first "complete" edition of The Story of the Stone, which they printed as Dream of the Red Chamber (繡像紅樓夢)."

So the printers were the ones who called it 繡像紅樓夢 or, now, 红楼梦. The title of the manuscript version must have been 石头记.

Oh ok... thanks.

[HalInc]

The Bible several times
Infinite Jest three times
War and Peace
In Search of Lost Time
Shelby Foote's history of the civil war

[Pearlstein]

The biggest would be Infinite Jest, Gravity's Rainbow, War and Peace and Les Miserables. War and Peace was probably the most enjoyable, there are some very boring parts in Les Miserables. Too much of those post modern books went over my head...and even rereading would leave me blank.

[ajvenigalla]

Conceived in Liberty by Murray N. Rothbard (the first three volumes; there are 4)

[syd.w]

Mine's Atlas Shrugged. Great book by a very interesting woman.