Would anyone here be interested in a sort of book club devoted to the reading and discussion of classical works? I love classical works, and I find that my understanding of them is greatly increased through discussion with others. I personally would be especially interested in classical Greek and Roman works, but really any classical work created before, say, 1900 would be fine. (Not that there are not going to be classics from the previous century, of course, but I feel that there will be too many disputes as to what constitutes a classic if a time so recent is considered. The 19th century will be bad enough. If we exhaust all readily available works (yeah right) from before then, perhaps we can later decide to consider it.)
Such discussion should have guidelines in order to keep (basically) on topic. Although by no means set in stone, I have a few ideas.
1. Obviously, general forum rules will be mandatory. Even if I did not agree with them (and for this forum I do), if nothing else it shows a basic respect towards our hosts and moderators.
2. There must be a method for choosing which work we will be reading and discussing at a certain time. I suggest (upon fairly little thought, so feel free to offer alternatives) the following. To prevent excessive arguments arising between which work we should discuss, I think that only the first (relatively arbitrary number next) four works nominated should be voted on. Any vote by an active member shall be counted; simple majority rules. The time limit for voting upon a work is (even more arbitrarily, but it should most likely be fairly short) four days.
3. The term "active member" shall refer to anyone who has posted anything directly pertaining to a work in the most recent discussion of any of the last five pieces, or voted on any work within any of the last three pieces. (Either/or, not both, although both is heartily encouraged.) This is intended to encourage participation in both voting and discussion, and to prevent those who lack either the time, motivation, or desire to influence the decision of which works are discussed. Inactive members can resume membership by discussing the most recent article, or voting in the last two elections of works to be discussed. I suggest that members who post in advance of vacations or similar necessary but temporary absences be granted reprieve of this rule for whichever duration be granted extensions of the timespan of their absence, barring excessive abuse of this policy.
4. Active membership is automatically granted to any new member who posts in the most recent discussion or vote, or an inactive member who fulfills the requirements to resume active membership.
5. In order to focus upon new (obviously not in every sense of the word ) works with relative frequency, the nominations for new works will begin two weeks (plus or minus one day for those too lazy to work out the time zones ) after the previous piece has been accepted towards discussion. If fewer than four works have been nominated within (I think this is good, but it is basically arbitrary) two weeks, voting shall take place between any works that have been nominated and last for (whichever # used above) four days. If only one work is nominated within that time, then it shall automatically become the work to be discussed. If two weeks pass with zero works being nominated, then the first work nominated shall automatically be up for discussion.
6. Any other serious, pertinent topic that I have forgotten. These rules are intended to facilitate discussion. Were this an ideal world, I believe they would be unnecessary, but I happen to believe the world we live in is not ideal.
I realize this seems like a lot of rules. My hope is that most of them will be unnecessary, if not at first, then at least eventually. Other than #1, which most everyone follows anyway, I encourage anyone to suggest modifications. The last five rules are intended for the sole purpose of encouraging and facilitating discussion of classical works. If more people think another method will work better for this goal, that is fine.
This thread is intended to discuss the rules, or if deemed appropriate by most members, the lack thereof. Although this is not even important enough to merit its own rule, I suggest that all nominations for the next work to be discussed be contained within a separate thread.
Hopefully enough people will be interested and later participate in this to make it a go, at least for some time. Once again, keep in mind that the primary idea is "Discussion of classical works," not "Danzig's rules." "Danzig's rules" exist for the sole purpose of promoting the primary purpose, and can easily be modified. Posted by Eaquae Legit (Member # 3063) on :
I'm interested, especially in classical Greek or Roman stuff. Roman in particular. Lemme know what happens with this. Posted by Audeo (Member # 5130) on :
I'm interested as well. I like all types of classical literature, and this will give me an incentive to read and discuss works I haven't come in contact with yet. Oh yeah and the rules look good too.
[ August 30, 2003, 11:33 PM: Message edited by: Audeo ]
Posted by Danzig (Member # 4704) on :
Audeo - the incentive part is a large part of why I thought and posted of this. My discipline grows by leaps and bounds if anyone else depends upon me in any way. Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
Too many rules.
Rule 1: everyone chats until they decide on a book they want to read, and a deadline for completion.
Rule 2: everyone who reads it by the deadline talks about it until they get tired of talking about it.
Repeat.
Posted by Carrie (Member # 394) on :
I'm definitely in. I also like Tom's rules - much easier Posted by littlemissattitude (Member # 4514) on :
This sounds like something I'd like to participate in. I don't have any strong feelings on the rules issue, so I won't go there. I'll keep an eye out for future disucssion of what we might be reading.
Posted by Chade Fallstar (Member # 5581) on :
I'd like to be in on this.
Posted by ak (Member # 90) on :
I'd love to be but here is my situation. I've joined several of these hatrack reading clubs and always what happens is I'm the only one who reads the book. Then I discuss it with nobody. Then it goes away. This happens with stunning regularity. So I finally decided if I was going to read a book by myself and talk about it with nobody, then I was darn well going to PICK the book I read.
Some of the books we've read were just fine but to tell the truth, lots of them were not things I would have read myself, except for the chimerical hope that someone else would be reading them too and discussing them with me, and the further chimerical hope that it would happen someday that we would read a book that I actually had picked out myself to read, and that someone ELSE would actually read that book as well and then talk to me about it.
So now I'm very choosy. We can pick any book at all, but unless it's one I would have chosen anyway, I'm not going to read it.
So, any nominations? I've got Dorothy Dunnett's King Hereafter on my shelf to be read right now. It's historical fiction, very well researched, about the guy who was the real life model for Shakespeare's Macbeth. Not exactly classical but I'm just throwing it out to see if anyone else thinks it sounds good.
Here are some more books I intend to read sometime soon.
[ August 31, 2003, 05:02 PM: Message edited by: ak ]
Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
Given the forum, I think a science fiction classic would be an excellent place to start; maybe Frankenstein, the War of the Worlds, or the Time Machine.
Posted by Chade Fallstar (Member # 5581) on :
Frankenstein is incredibly overrated. I liked ak's list. Some very good suggestions on there.
Posted by Mintieman (Member # 4620) on :
I'm interested as well, although I am a newbie, I lurk round these parts, and I'll defenitely keep an eye out
Posted by Teshi (Member # 5024) on :
Maybe if I have some incentive I'll read all those books I've been meaning to read, but never knew existed.
I'm in.
Posted by Godric (Member # 4587) on :
ak:
quote:Umberto Eco: The Name of the Rose Ralph Ellison: Invisible Man Goethe: Foust: Part One Salman Rushdie: The Satanic Verses Alexander Dumas: The Count of Monte Cristo
I've read these and I plan on reading:
quote:James Joyce: Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man Amy Tan: The Bonesetter's Daughter Chaim Potok: In the Beginning
Great list, ak! I'm not familiar with some of your other selections though, but maybe I'll check them out.
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
Some of those books sound great, but don't really meet the criteria for the group discussion.....I'm pretty sure both Amy Tan and Joe Haldaman were post-1900.....
Kwea
Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
*starts flame war over Frankenstein*
Frankenstein is NOT incredibly overrated, it's just misrepresented. It isn't a horror novel.
Posted by blacwolve (Member # 2972) on :
I'd love to do this, it will probably give me incentive to read books that will come in usefull on the AP Literature test, and books that I just really should read but would never do sso on my own. If anyone wants more ideas, our teacher gave us a fairly long list of book suggestions on the first day of school, and I could post it. *shrugs* Just if anyone's interested.
Posted by Carrie (Member # 394) on :
Any of those would be fine
blacwolve - Post your list! I'm always interested to see what the AP people have decided to make kids read this year And you never know, some of them might be good.
Posted by Erik Slaine (Member # 5583) on :
I have to agree with fugu13. Mary Shelly's work was a precursor to much. It is a classic Romantic novel, and should seriously be considered.
Just what are "classics" considered here, anyway? Are we talking Moby Dick or Phillip K.? The Old Man and The Sea or Breakfast of Champions?
Posted by Chade Fallstar (Member # 5581) on :
Frankenstein WAS a precursor to much, yes. Frankenstein was not a horror novel, obviously. Frankenstein still is overrated and quite a bore to read.
::engages in flame war::
Posted by aspectre (Member # 2222) on :
Whudda you know? You'd pay $15grand for a $300 toy.
Posted by Erik Slaine (Member # 5583) on :
Not much of a flamewar, eh?
(Let's you and Chade fight!)
[ August 31, 2003, 02:37 PM: Message edited by: Erik Slaine ]
Posted by Chade Fallstar (Member # 5581) on :
I'd pay 15 grand for a 300 dollar toy if I had 15 grand to waste I said. Which by my calculations will be.....never.
Posted by Teshi (Member # 5024) on :
I do have to say that the $15 000 dollar hovercraft looks a darn sight better than the $300 one, even if it is more expensive.
[ August 31, 2003, 02:44 PM: Message edited by: Teshi ]
Posted by Chade Fallstar (Member # 5581) on :
Yes, the more expensive one looks more intimidating. A box with a tire under it won't make anyone think you are cool.
Posted by aspectre (Member # 2222) on :
Ha! Erik, ya can't even recognise a perfectly nasty&irrelevant ad hominum attack when ya see one.
Literary threads are so easy to derail
Posted by Erik Slaine (Member # 5583) on :
Aren't they, though?
Mind you, hovercraft bites can be pretti nasti....
Posted by ak (Member # 90) on :
[ August 31, 2003, 03:35 PM: Message edited by: ak ]
Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
Frankenstein is one of the most brilliant stories of a tragic hero ever written.
Posted by Dragon (Member # 3670) on :
Atrimis Fowl is good!
I read the Count of Monte Cristo (very good!) and Invisible Man (10th grade honors summer reading) this summer... if anyone reads them I will be glad to discuss.
Posted by Danzig (Member # 4704) on :
Now that I am sober, I agree with Tom that my original rules are too much. The things that seem to make so much sense the night before... Anyway, the rules he proposed will be much more fun if enough people stick to them. Perhaps we take things to a vote (rather than consensus) if an overly long period of time (a week or two) passes arguing over what to read, but other than that it seems pretty good.
Organizational stuff: Perhaps each actual discussion about a work should have its own thread, but the arguing over which work we read can inhabit its own separate but ongoing thread. Or maybe we just have two threads, one for the discussion and one for the choosing. Or just lump everything into one. Anyone care?
ak- I know, and I worry about this too, but we have to have some way of deciding the work. For all I care you could just say which one we read every so often, but others might desire something more democratic. My main concern is that something is picked by someone or ones, on a fairly regular basis.
Posted by Erik Slaine (Member # 5583) on :
I love that summation fugu13! Posted by blacwolve (Member # 2972) on :
I just looked for it, and apparently I sort of threw it away, a little bit. Raia, if you're reading this thread, can you post it?
Posted by BelladonnaOrchid (Member # 188) on :
Danzig, AK, this sounds like a good idea. I'm not very good at picking out interesting classical works, and this might help me get familiar with some.
::note to self:: Must keep tabs on this thread.
Posted by Deirdre (Member # 4200) on :
I think you should do Heart of a Dog. That way I can dazzle you all with my Russian literary prowess.
Posted by ak (Member # 90) on :
Deirdre, I read The Master and Margarita by Bulgakov and he's really good. I love all the Russian writers I've ever read, in fact. Most of my very favorites were 19th c. but One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich by Solzhenitsyn also rocked! The thing that was so wonderful about it was its simplicity and total lack of sentimentality. It just told the day. That was very powerful.
Do you like Russians? Who are your favorites?
[ August 31, 2003, 11:50 PM: Message edited by: ak ]
Posted by ak (Member # 90) on :
Danzig, how about I put up a huge long list of possibilities and you guys pick which one sounds good to you? I would say you pick anything at all but if you don't pick something I want to read then I won't read it. (Sorry for being that way but I've learned.) And if I don't read it, it's a good chance nobody at all will. At least if history is any guide.
This is probably the fifth reading club we've had on hatrack since I've been here. I'm excited about it. I hope it flies this time. Posted by Deirdre (Member # 4200) on :
quote:Do you like Russians? Who are your favorites?
Yeah, there's something about it that really resonates with me. It's hard to put my finger on it. Something about the mix of idealism, cynicism, soulfulness, dark humor, and melodrama. Some authors I like more than others, but for some reason I always feel like I know where they're coming from--more so than with Brits and Americans, oddly enough--even if some of the cultural references are lost on me.
I also prefer 19th century Russian literature. Dostoyevsky is still officially my favorite author, but I’m starting to appreciate Tolstoy and some others more and more in my old age. Even Chekhov, whom I used to hate, is starting to grow on me from sheer over exposure. He short story “The Black Monk” is simply fabulous.
Posted by littlemissattitude (Member # 4514) on :
About the only suggestion that I have as far as choosing books is this: it would be nice if the chosen books were easily available at most libraries or in inexpensive (say, under ten dollars) paperbacks. Some of us (me, for example) don't have a lot of extra disposable funds to spend on books (for me, even ten dollars is a lot to spend on a book right now), but would still like to be able to participate. Seems like anything that falls into the "classics" category should probably qualify.
Posted by Deirdre (Member # 4200) on :
I was mostly kidding in my first post, btw. I would like read some more Bulgakov, but unfortunately I'm going to be gone a lot next month, so I might not be able to participate. I will if I can, but I should probably stay out of the whole selection process.
[ September 01, 2003, 01:00 AM: Message edited by: Deirdre ]
Posted by Eaquae Legit (Member # 3063) on :
In response to missattitude, if it turns out to be a Greek or Roman text, I know where both the originals and a translation (sometimes two) can be found online.
Posted by littlemissattitude (Member # 4514) on :
That would be very cool. Thank you.
Especially, I might add, if it were something from the Romans. I took two semesters of Latin, and I would love to have an original and a translation to compare and to practice my Latin (which gets very rusty very quickly, I find).
Posted by Chade Fallstar (Member # 5581) on :
Dead Russian authors. Yum.
Posted by Feyd Baron (Member # 1407) on :
Well, I'm not sure I can devote full time to this, but if y'all go with ak's suggestion of Glass Bead Game (Master Ludi), then I might have to participate. I actually loaned my copy to a fellow hatracker a few days ago.
I'll have to watch and think about the others.
Feyd Baron, DoC
Posted by ak (Member # 90) on :
Feyd, he actually seems to have won the Nobel prize for literature on the strength of that novel. In some ways it sounds as though it's his master work. I've read everything else by him except those two (Demian and Glass Bead Game).
Deirdre, Dostoyevsky is my favorite as well, but I also really love Turgenev, Tolstoy, Gogol, and all the rest, actually. Yeah, something about their pure passionate idealism mixed with their wry cynical humor (though it's a cheerful cynicism) added to the deep intellectualism and that specially Russian form of irony just sends me. I even like the accent! <laughs> The best novelists of all time are just Russians. Who knows why, they just are! Posted by Chade Fallstar (Member # 5581) on :
Actually, I rather like the suggestion of either Glass Bead Game or Demian. Either one of those would be an excellent way to start off. And don't worry ak, as long as this thing gets off the ground I'll read the books along with you.
Posted by Narnia (Member # 1071) on :
Ok ak...looks like we've got a bandwagon! Post that list!!
Posted by ak (Member # 90) on :
[ September 01, 2003, 11:25 PM: Message edited by: ak ]
Posted by Raia (Member # 4700) on :
quote: Raia, if you're reading this thread, can you post it?
No problem:
SUGGESTED OUTSIDE READING: Their Eyes Were Watching God , by Zora Neale Hurston Wide Saragasso Sea , by Jean Rhys The Canterbury Tales , by Goeffrey Chaucer The Awakening , by Kate Chopin Gulliver's Travels , by Jonathan Swift Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man , by James Joyce Crime and Punishment , by Fyodor Dostoyevski Mrs. Dalloway , by Virginia Woolf Beloved , by Toni Morrison A Passage to India , by E. M. Forster The Plague , by Albert Camus Jude the Obscure , by Thomas Hardy Graet Expectations , by Charles Dickens Exodus , by Leon Uris The Natural , by Bernard Malamud Zorba the Greek , by Nikos Kazantzakis Things Fall Apart , by Chinua Achebe The Bridge on the Drina , by Ivo Andric Lord Jim , by Joseph Conrad
OTHER SUGGESTED AUTHORS: Jane Austen Emily Bronte Kate Chopin Henry Fielding Hanry James D. H. Lawrence Vladimir Nabokov John Updike Virginia Woolf Saul Bellow Raymond Carver William Faulkner F. Scott Fitzgerald James Joyce Gabriel Garcia Marquez Mark Twain John Steinbeck Margaret Atwood George Eliot Thomas Hardy Alice Walker Kurt Vonnegut Charles Dickens Richard Wright George Bernad Shaw Ernest Hemingway E. M. Forester
We are also required to read a whole bunch of things, but I don't have them conveniently listed in one place. If you want to know, I have no problem posting them, but otherwise, I'll stop here.
And I'm with blacwolve, I'd like to join the group (if I actually have time to read anything) so that it will hopefully help me (I've read maybe two of those works, if that!)
Posted by ginette (Member # 852) on :
He, where is Shakespeare? And Homerus? And Caesar?
But anyway, I am in. I'll read anything you pick, because I have never participated in a book club before. Tell you what, I'll be the one who reads it in the original language as long as it's not Russian .
Posted by Dragon (Member # 3670) on :
John Steinbeck
I read The Pearl in 6th grade...
Posted by Ryan Hart (Member # 5513) on :
I'm totally in.
The Illiad- Homer (translated by Alexander Pope)
that would be like double classic.
Posted by ak (Member # 90) on :
Ryan, I have that! I started reading it but it's ... it's ..... it's POPE! I mean it's all 18th century and stuff. Nothing like Homer at all! So I quit.
Posted by Ryan Hart (Member # 5513) on :
Yeah. True. I also would suggest Dracula by Bram Stoker
Posted by ak (Member # 90) on :
[ September 01, 2003, 11:23 PM: Message edited by: ak ]
Posted by ak (Member # 90) on :
I added those new ones to the bottom of the comprehensive list on the previous page. Why don't we take a vote? Everyone who plans to actually read the book please cast a vote for your preference. We will have a run off if none is a clear winner after the first round. The links take you to pages with blurbs, covers, and reviews, where available. Take a look and cast your votes, folks! Posted by Danzig (Member # 4704) on :
As I kind of sort of know what the Myth of Sisyphus is about, I'll go for that one.
Posted by ak (Member # 90) on :
Okay, looks like we also have 2 votes for The Glass Bead Game and one for Demian.
Posted by Chade Fallstar (Member # 5581) on :
Not many votes going on.
Posted by Zalmoxis (Member # 2327) on :
Ugh. I'll read anything but Hesse.
Posted by Ryan Hart (Member # 5513) on :
I vote The Persians. I'm a Greek nut.
Posted by Carrie (Member # 394) on :
I'm also for The Persians.
Woot! Tally that vote!
Posted by blacwolve (Member # 2972) on :
The Glass Bead Game
Posted by Mintieman (Member # 4620) on :
Steinbeck sounds good
Posted by aspectre (Member # 2222) on :
Since the thread originator started with "...any classical work created before, say, 1900 would be fine", perhaps a selection out of ProjectGutenberg? No disagreements about 'classical'. With the added benefit that those who cannot find the selected text in a bookstore nearby, can't afford it, do not have a well-stocked library, etc, have easy access to a free source.
[ September 03, 2003, 04:29 AM: Message edited by: aspectre ]
Posted by Danzig (Member # 4704) on :
aspectre has a very good point about the whole "free" thing.
Posted by solo (Member # 3148) on :
I realize it's not a classic, but it is on the list and I just started reading it anyway so my vote is for Artemis Fowl.
Posted by blacwolve (Member # 2972) on :
*bump*
Anyone else going to vote?
Posted by Raia (Member # 4700) on :
The Glass Bead Game, I think... from what I hear...
Posted by jehovoid (Member # 2014) on :
Don Quixote, Paradise Lost...
Was Jane Austen mentioned?
Victor Hugo!!
(by the way, I don't have time to participate in the reading-discussion group, I'm just making the already-too-long list of suggestions even longer)
[ September 03, 2003, 11:39 PM: Message edited by: jehovoid ]
Posted by ak (Member # 90) on :
Looks like 4 for The Glass Bead Game and 2 for the Persians.
Zalmoxis, you don't like Hesse? I'm curious why not. What of his have you read? I've read Siddhartha, Narcissus and Goldmund, Steppenwolf, and I think that's all, but I love how passionate he is. The Glass Bead Game is the one he supposedly won the Nobel Prize in literature for, though they don't officially assign the prize to a given work. Often it's something in particular that prompts it, and this was his. I just thought it would be worth reading. It's maybe his master work.
Posted by Zalmoxis (Member # 2327) on :
ak: To be honest, I've only read Siddhartha and Steppenwolf and it's been awhile. I guess the lingering impression I have of Hesse is that his prose tries to hard to invest itself with meaning -- too much of the look here! this is allegorical or symbolic.
And in general, I'm just not a fan of the post-WWII male German novelists.
However, I'm always willing to revise my opinion. And I do feel the need to read some German fiction -- it's been a while. And if I'm going to read Hesse it might as well be his meisterwerk.
So:
I'll be reading _The Glass Bead Game_ sometime in the next three weeks -- if any of the rest of you would like to also do so, I'd love to discuss it here at Hatrack.
Posted by Ophelia (Member # 653) on :
I put Das Glasperlenspiel on my list as the next German book I want to read for fun. So I vote for that (The Glass Bead Game).
Posted by Zalmoxis (Member # 2327) on :
Show off.
The rest of us will read ours in translation.
Posted by Deirdre (Member # 4200) on :
The only thing I know about Hesse is that a good friend of mine dated a guy who was really into him and turned out to be a real creep. But I guess I'll take a stab at it.
All 590-some pages of it.
(Heartofadogisonly150somepagesgrumblegrumble.)
[ September 04, 2003, 01:52 PM: Message edited by: Deirdre ]
Posted by Zalmoxis (Member # 2327) on :
Hey, now. Be grateful we're not asking you to wade through all 720 pages of Thomas Mann's _The Magic Mountain_
[which is actually a great novel, btw].
Posted by Deirdre (Member # 4200) on :
Yeah, but I don't mind reading 720 pages of a good novel. I do mind reading 590 pages of creepy intellectual posturing.
So all I'm saying is, no promises.
Or rather, I promise only that if I don't finish the book I'll try very very hard to control my English class BS reflex and not pretend I know what the book's all about when I only got up to page 73.
Posted by ak (Member # 90) on :
Oh, yeah! Anyone who hates it please feel free to stop and then rant about why you hated it to all of us! That's totally okay. I'll read it too as soon as I finish the book I'm on. (James Baldwin's Giovanni's Room, in case anyone cares.)
Whoever finishes first just start posting here. We will assume there will be spoilers so other people who are reading it too can decide whether to venture in here or not between now and the time they finish.
Deirdre, I'll read Russians with you any time! If we don't pick one for our next one here, then we can do a separate Russian Reading club too, if you like! I can read a book every night or two (if I will limit my hatracking some ) so am not even near the saturation point yet.
Posted by Deirdre (Member # 4200) on :
I just might take you up on that, ak.
Posted by Zalmoxis (Member # 2327) on :
ak: I'd be interested to hear your take on the female characters in _Giovanni's Room_.
Posted by Dragon (Member # 3670) on :
Thanks for that website!
Posted by blacwolve (Member # 2972) on :
I'm almost finished with Anna Karenina, if anyone would like to discuss it. I really like it.
Posted by Raia (Member # 4700) on :
I did finish it. I'd be happy to talk about that too. *on time, cough...*
Posted by blacwolve (Member # 2972) on :
We don't have to have it finished for 4 weeks, it's not my fault you overachieve. Posted by Raia (Member # 4700) on :
Actually, technically we had to have it done before school started... it's not my fault you procrastinate until the teachers decide to give us a break. Sorry, I'm just a better student than you are.
Posted by blacwolve (Member # 2972) on :
I would have gotten it done if I hadn't talked to the teacher BEFORE school started, and been told I didn't need to.
*looks around*
Oh, were you having a discussion, what? A book group? How nice.
Posted by Mintieman (Member # 4620) on :
*cough* bump *cough*
This isn't going ahead anymore?
Posted by ak (Member # 90) on :
It is for me. I'm reading!
I'm still reading Giovanni's room right now, and it's making me very sad. Very sad. For a number of reasons that have nothing whatsoever to do with homosexuality. That's why it's taking me so long, I guess. I keep having to steel myself to read on. We already know things turn out disasterously.
Zalmoxis, you asked what I think of the female characters in this book and so far I've only really seen one, the aunt, and she's interesting. She's very strong but also very critical of David's father. Well, should she be? I'm not sure. We don't like her very much. Why not? Maybe because she doesn't really seem to love anyone. The father doesn't either but we don't hold that against him because he's so obviously helpless.
It's very interesting to contrast these characters with the family in Go Tell it on the Mountain which I had thought echoed James Baldwin's own family. In that book the (step)father is definitely the heavy, and the mother is a good guy. But there is still that aunt who is very strong and very critical of her brother. In GTiotM the aunt is fairly sympathetic, in that she at least stands up and tells her brother the truth. That Deborah was not the enemy of anybody.
In this book we really don't like the aunt, nor, so far, the absent girlfriend. She seems to be off trying to decide whether she really loves this guy, and I have to wonder if there is some lack of chemistry in their physical connection that comes from him really preferring and being more attracted to men.
As for Giovanni and the first boyfriend (Joey?), I just feel very very sympathetic to both of them. I really wonder if I'm going to be able to like the viewpoint character at all in this book. How do you give your heart to someone who destroys those he loves most?
[ September 10, 2003, 08:55 AM: Message edited by: ak ]
Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
I like the pre-1900 rule. I like Amy Tan and all, but calling her classic reminds me of the "Michael Jordan is an artist" line of thought.
Posted by Danzig (Member # 4704) on :
Okay, believe it or not I really did mean to resurrect this thread today, but someone else did it first. ak, you seem to be the one who has collected the votes, so which book are we reading?
Posted by Zalmoxis (Member # 2327) on :
I now have my copy of _The Glass Bead Game_. I'll start reading it this evening.
------
blacwolve: I'm interested in discussing _Anna Karenina_. What do you want to talk about?
I'll start with one comment: one of the things I like about the novel is how Tolstoy actually made me like Vronsky and understand why he would be attractive to Anna. I don't come readymade with sympathy for type-A, reckless, charmers. I tend toward the more brooding, cautious types. But I kind of get Vronsky because Tolstoy renders him so well. The same is true of the other characters in the novel. It's why I like it so much.
------- ak: I asked because I came away with the novel with the sense that Baldwin doesn't know how to write female characters very well or what to do with them. Part of that (or maybe all of that), of course, has to do with the viewpoint character's attitude towards women so it's hard for me to separate that out from the overall effects of the story.
Posted by blacwolve (Member # 2972) on :
I was amazed with Tolstoy's characterization. The characters were so utterly believable, it was hard for me to imagine they were all writen by the same man.
(I've never been in a discussion group, I'm not really sure what you're supposed to do)
In other, related news: I just finished The Chosen and was in shock for a day after! I had assumed he would be boring because he's so highly thought of; instead it was incredible! Now I'm almost finished with Davita's Harp which I don't like nearly as well, it's so sad!
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
Have you tried My Name is Asher Lev? I LOVE that book.
[ September 10, 2003, 05:15 PM: Message edited by: katharina ]
Posted by Raia (Member # 4700) on :
quote: Deirdre, I'll read Russians with you any time! If we don't pick one for our next one here, then we can do a separate Russian Reading club too, if you like!
Hey, how about "The Master and Margarita?" Either next, or now, whatever... I was planning on having that be my second independent reading project in AP lit... it's by Michael Bulgakov, I think... something like that...
Posted by Zalmoxis (Member # 2327) on :
That hack piece? No way!
Posted by ak (Member # 90) on :
I've already read the Master and Margarita, but I'll be glad to discuss it with anyone. Also Anna Karenina, which is my favorite Tolstoy novel.
I was not calling Amy Tan a classic, just giving a wide variety of books for people to choose from. Actually this is only a partial list of books I've got that I'm planning to read. When I go to the bookstore I often pick up several things and sometimes don't read them all before going back again. I tend to read all the fluff first <laughs> then work my way into the deeper stuff as the mood takes me. So I seem to have lots of things lying around waiting to be read at any given time. Which is nice. Sort of a book-storage program for emergencies, though I don't think I have a year's worth collected up yet.
Seems like The Glass Bead Game got the most votes for the first round, so I'll be reading that directly I get done with Giovanni's room. I await other people's thoughts with great anticipation.
Posted by blacwolve (Member # 2972) on :
No, I haven't, I just started reading him because The Chosen was small enough to fit under my desk in government, and I'd heard of him before.
I'm reading Far From the Madding Crowd next, for the same reasons.
Posted by ak (Member # 90) on :
blacwolve, I LOVE Potok, too, but I've already read almost everything by him. The two Asher Lev books were my absolute favorites, but all his stuff is very good. I'd love to discuss Potok with anyone who is interested as well.
Posted by ak (Member # 90) on :
I'm really excited with how many people we have responding to this thread now! Mayhap this will actually take off and become self sustaining. I'm thrilled!
Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
I love Anna Karenina too. Confession, that's what I thought your ID stood for the first time I saw it. But that's because I'm mental.
I make a motion that when we finally pick a book we change the thread title to that.
I'm not up for arguing in favor of any specific book. I'm not well read in a breadth sense. I'm just to hammered right now. Not by alcohol, FYI, just hammered.
Posted by ak (Member # 90) on :
Ah, pooka, I see myself as more of a Rodion Romanovich Raskalnikov than an Anna. Or maybe someday I'll be a Sonia. She's probably my favorite character in all of literature. I heard Marilyn Monroe did a wonderful job playing Sonia in some movie version of Crime and Punishment that I've never seen but I'd love to see someday.
Someone once told me I reminded them of Prince Myskhin and I don't think I've ever had a nicer compliment.
But no, ak stands for Anne Kate, or Anna Katarina in Russian, or Ana Kata in Greek (which is a way of saying first one way then the other, which is also quite apt). <laughs>
And it seems we do have a consensus on our first book which is "The Glass Bead Game" by Hermann Hesse. If Danzig likes he can change the thread title temporarily to reflect that. We might as well pile all the discussions into this one thread, if that suits people, so we can add more later or go back to earlier books at will.
Posted by Zalmoxis (Member # 2327) on :
Another _Anna Karenina_ observation:
I love the whole novel (especially the ending), but there's something about the episode with Levin's dying brother that really gets to me. Part of it may be how 'current' the situation still is -- you know, the sick, drugged out brother with the (somewhat) skanky girlfriend. [note: none of my brothers take drugs or have skanky girlfriends]. Another factor is the physicality of it all. Toltstoy totally captures the textures and smells and gestures of a sick man's room. And finally, the way Kitty and Levin negotiate through the experience and how it affects their relationship seems very true to life.
It's not my favorite part of the work by any means -- it's a rather unpleasant episode. But it works. And it stays with me.
Any other sections that particularly grabbed people?
-----
I should add (in case Raia didn't know or had forgotten) that I actually love _The Master and Margarita_ (yes, the author is Bulgakov), and I've recommended it numerous times on this site.
Posted by Zalmoxis (Member # 2327) on :
For Deirdre and any others who have met creepy Hesse devotees:
I had the same preconceptions, but I found the following passage from the forward to my translation of _The Glass Bead Game_ heartening...
"...the Hesse cult in the United States has revolved primarily around such painfully humorless works as _Demian_ and _Siddhartha_, in which readers have discovered an anticipation of their infatuation with Eastern mysticism, pacifism, the search for personal values, and revolt against the establishment. Those who have gone on to _Steppenwolf_ have greeted it as a psychedelic orgy of sex, drugs, and jazz, but have conveniently overlooked the ironic attitude through which those superficial effects are put back into perspective by the author. It was partly as a reaction against such self-indulgent interpretations, which he encountered as much as forty years ago, that Hesse undertook _The Glass Bead Game_." (Theodore Ziolkowski)
On to the reading!
Posted by ak (Member # 90) on :
Yes! I found Hesse himself to be quite good, coming to him as I did decades after the spin put on him by some of his early fans. To me he is more in the tradition of Goethe, just a passionate and deeply thinking person. The opposite of how some people would maybe like to see him as a sort of mindless free love type.
[ September 10, 2003, 06:58 PM: Message edited by: ak ]
Posted by Deirdre (Member # 4200) on :
Hey guys,
I'm going to be out of town for a week or so, but I do have a copy of the book, which I have actually started (and read through page 17!), and I should be should be able to get through a chunk of it while I'm away. So don't get any funny ideas like, hey, no one else is reading the book so I guess I'm off the hook. I'll check in when I get back.
Posted by Chade Fallstar (Member # 5581) on :
I'll be starting The Glass Bead Game tomorrow and will gladly talk about it once I am finished.
Posted by Zalmoxis (Member # 2327) on :
It's the latter days of the Feuilletonistic Age.
Posted by asQmh (Member # 4590) on :
When we start any Eco stuff, I'm all in. ^_^ I kinda came to the thread late.
I'd vote Potok, but like others, I've already read all of his stuff (and would willingly read it again). Kind of the same with Eco; I've already read several of his, but would be more than happy to re-read as long as there were people to discuss it with. . .
Nifty.
Q.
Posted by blacwolve (Member # 2972) on :
We could start another thread to discuss Potok, I've just discovered him and no one I know has heard of him, please? <insert begging smiley here>
Posted by ak (Member # 90) on :
We can discuss Potok here if you like! He's so wonderful! Which book(s) are you reading / have you read?
Posted by blacwolve (Member # 2972) on :
I have read The Chosen and Davita's Harp. I'm in the middle of My Name is Asher Lev and should be finished with it by Monday afternoon. The Chosen was my favorite of the two I've read, but Davita's Harp grows on me the more I think about it.
Posted by Zalmoxis (Member # 2327) on :
Q: I'm not going to try to tell you that if you like Eco, you'll like Hesse. But you should try _The Glass Bead Game_.
Like Eco's works, it's about philsophy, aesthetics, monasticism, patterns (esp. mathmatics and music), and the role of learning in the 'real world.'
Posted by Danzig (Member # 4704) on :
Okay, there are several works floating around, and I really do not have time to read more than one at a time... Can we settle on The Glass Bead Game? I should be able to pick it up either tomorrow evening or Sunday, and hopefully read it on Sunday.
Posted by blacwolve (Member # 2972) on :
Did someone just ghost bump this?
Posted by Raia (Member # 4700) on :
quote: We could start another thread to discuss Potok, I've just discovered him and no one I know has heard of him, please? <insert begging smiley here>
I've heard of him!!!!!!!
I just haven't read him...
Posted by asQmh (Member # 4590) on :
Oooh. A Potok thread! That would be fabulous.
Zal - Hesse: I've only read Siddartha, but I'm willing to give The Glass Bead Game a shot. I'm up for all manner of recommendations.
Q.
Posted by ak (Member # 90) on :
Okay, I finished Giovanni's Room tonight and am starting on The Glass Bead Game.
Giovanni's Room was really good for me right now. It's amazing how clear things are when you see them in books.
As I see the story, David, the main character, killed himself, his fiancee Hella, and his male lover Giovanni by being dishonest in his loves. Oh, and he also destroyed another friend much earlier named Joey.
The thing that struck me was how men define themselves as men by the women who love them, how those women act, and how they treat them, and who they are. And so do women define themselves as women according to the men who love them in the same way. David could not accept the him that was defined by his love for Giovanni (or for Joey earlier). So he let himself love them, but then denied that love inside himself, and rejected their love and rejected them as people. He tried to make the definition of himself as a man be about the girl Hella, instead. But that was a lie, though he loved her too. He didn't love her truly, as he did Giovanni. After he killed Giovanni, he couldn't stand the sight of her anymore.
What does this mean? Well, I guess one thing is that being desperately confused about whom you love is very destructive, both to yourself and to those you love, yet how could he help that? He was a tragic figure because he really didn't know himself well enough to decide. Yet he was so... I don't know... dispassionate about the destruction he caused, that it was very hard to feel sympathy for him. I have to say that I don't like David, except for just understanding his humanness, his weakness, the tragedy of that, and feeling for him. Oh, and also the fact that "David" wrote this book (clearly he is the character James Baldwin himself identifies with), means that he does see what he did and feel it, the wrongness of it.
So is it right or wrong the way we define ourselves as women and men by the way we are treated by the opposite sex? Is a person who is so strong in themselves that they can't be deeply hurt by someone they love even human? Is that even love? It seems like real love is like Christ's love. Love that gives everything. Life itself. Yet after being scourged and tortured and sacrificed, love still lives. It rises ever again and again. It is made of flesh yet it transcends flesh, and is immortal, indestructible, ever reborn. Spring comes every year and love ever rises again from the flames.
<Rises as a dragon from the ashes and flies away across the solar system.>
[ September 14, 2003, 11:05 PM: Message edited by: ak ]
Posted by Deirdre (Member # 4200) on :
Page 74. Observations.
Hesse was a morning person. I'm almost sure of it.
And he definately wore a watch. A digital one with a seconds display, a calendar, a calculator, and a compass.
He'd also have a PDA, if they'd been invented back then.
Oh, and one other thing [SPOILERS! sort of]: *
*
*
The next time he mentions how the common children are mean to Knecht and the other special children because they are actually secretly envious I'm going to have to do something drastic, like key the first car I see with an Honor Student bumpersticker. It's really starting to get to me.
[/resume vacation]
Posted by Zalmoxis (Member # 2327) on :
So...
_The Glass Bead Game_ is essentially speculative fiction. Who new? It takes place several centuries from now.
---- Deirdre: I know. Isn't it funny?
Posted by ana kata (Member # 5666) on :
Yeah, boy he sure doesn't know how to write science fiction does he? Can you say "TOO MUCH EXPOSITION!!!!" ?
I'm still in the freaking introduction which I wish I could just skip. But he's describing what seems to be a dystopia of people all working crossword puzzles and listening to these stupid lectures and having no real intellectual depth or artistic vision, but MAN I wonder what he would have thought about television? I mean he truly has no IDEA!
[ September 17, 2003, 11:06 PM: Message edited by: ana kata ]
Posted by Raia (Member # 4700) on :
Hehe. I know how you feel.
Posted by littlemissattitude (Member # 4514) on :
I finally got "The Glass Bead Game" out of the library. I keep nibbiling into it, but I don't know. I'm not sure this is really for me. Well, I'll give it a try, since I got hold of it.
Posted by ana kata (Member # 5666) on :
I feel bad for poor Hermann. I want to tell him not to worry that it all worked out okay. But maybe he wouldn't even think that, who knows? Maybe he's very very glad he is dead before he saw what a total mess the world is in today!
I hate science fiction in the orwellian type of warning or political axe-grinding or whatever mode, don't you guys? I hope this book isn't going to be like that.
Posted by Deirdre (Member # 4200) on :
quote: Deirdre: I know. Isn't it funny?
Not really, at least not at the moment. What's funny to me right now is the though of Zamyatin and Hesse in a cage match, fighting to the death. Funny because Zamyatin, of course, would win.
Posted by Deirdre (Member # 4200) on :
quote: I'm still in the freaking introduction which I wish I could just skip.
I have bad news, ak. I actually found the introduction more interesting than the first chapter, which deals with Knecht's childhood. But then again, I find children boring, and I love Orwellian doom and gloom, even if it's overblown, as long as it's articulate and well-observed. I love anything that promises to shake me out of my complacency.
So I had some hope starting out, after reading that bit Zal posted from the forward, which suggested that the book might not be completely humorless (humor makes all the difference for me when dealing with these dry German intellectuals) and reading lines like this in the introduction:
quote:in all of [the lectures] a number of fashionable phrases were shaken up like dice in a cup and everyone was delighted if he dimly recognized one or two catchwords.
But now that the apocolypic wry-analysis-of-contempory-culture theme has been replaced by the the-superiority-of-the-well-tempered-artist-beloved-by-the-masters-to-the-volatile-artist-"of bad character"-who-has-issues-with-authority, I'm starting to get bored and annoyed.
I'm still on page 74. I took a break, but now I'm going give it another go. I'm still hoping it'll pick up a bit.
[ September 18, 2003, 06:59 PM: Message edited by: Deirdre ]
Posted by Zalmoxis (Member # 2327) on :
I see and kind of agree. The problem of this text is that it demands a reader who has the patience and interest to wade through the thick stuff and at the same time not get so caught up in it as to take it completely seriously. It is deeply ironic and that's why Ziolkowski believes that part of Hesse's motivation for writing it was to discomfit those who took his earlier works so seriously, who flatten his intentions.
In other words, the way the material is presented is part of the satire of the novel. So for instance, I find it hilarious how the narrator is always going on about how, as a proper Castalian, he is avoiding a psychological approach to biography and yet the reified versions of Knecht's life that we get seem to rely heavily on perceptions of his psychology, of his inner life. As the novel progresses, you realize how brilliant Knecht is for forcing the Castalians to have to approach his life like this, like they do, and yet at the same time because you can only approach him through their materials, you realize that you can't quite see him clearly.
And yep, the novel is almost all exposition. It is a work of speculative fiction, but it's certainly not like most sf books, and only fits into that category as an idea [it's a speculation into the future of culture and cultural history] -- not as a part of the genre.
I want to talk about the volatile vs. well-tempered artist, but later.
Finally, the million dollar question is how much Hesse participates in his own denunciation. Does he have sympathies for elements of the Castalian life, esp. for music and meditation? Is it wholly ironic or is he implicated in the irony himself? I think this question can be better dealt with after the supplementary materials (the poems and three life histories) have been read [which I have yet to fully do].
Posted by Deirdre (Member # 4200) on :
Hmmmm. You've read past page 74, haven't you, Zal.
I did note the irony, but for some reason it never occured to me that it might be intended. In the first chapter, I figured Hesse was using the Music Master as a mouthpeice since he seemed like such a benevolant, authoratative figure, kind of like Zosima in The Brothers Karamozov (though, granted, some would argue that Zosima is an ironic figure as well). I guess I'd better read a little further.
Posted by ana kata (Member # 5666) on :
Oh, no, surely it's not all exposition! Arrrgh! Okay, I'll read at least through the second chapter and if it doesn't get more interesting by then I'm going to start skipping over the slow parts.
Heck, his other stuff was really good, I thought. I mean even when I didn't particularly identify with the characters, they were still very interesting characters that I cared about.
Posted by Feyd Baron (Member # 1407) on :
Look, get past the first 150 pages of Glass Bead Game. I thought many times about giving up on it before then, but never once after that.
At least in my opinion, it is very much worth sticking with the book.
Feyd Baron, DoC
Posted by ana kata (Member # 5666) on :
Okay, I talked to someone else today who said this book is really great. Just to keep on going and we will see. That made me feel a lot better about it, that there will be some sort of payoff for all this FREAKING EXPOSITION!!!!!
<laughs>
Posted by ana kata (Member # 5666) on :
I don't know why it's taking me so long to read this book. No, I guess I do. Until tonight I was slogging through it. But I just finished the episode with the improvisation in chapter one and that was completely charming to me. I think I am catching the spirit in which he has written this and feeling very happy about it. I will definitely pick up the pace now, I think. Thanks to those who encouraged me to keep going! Anyone else still reading? Anyone decide to give it up?
Posted by Deirdre (Member # 4200) on :
I cleared page 150 a couple days ago. It's still pretty slow going, but I do plan to stick with it. Nothing has really charmed me so far, but some of his characters and ideas keep popping into my mind every now and again, especially recently when I was reading the Bloom/King thread. Also, there’s new character, Tegularius, who promises to be one of those brilliant unstable types you and I find so perversely fascinating. He hasn't done much yet, but it's enough to keep my hopes up.
So keep slogging. We're still with you.
Posted by Zalmoxis (Member # 2327) on :
You kwow, that's kind of how I feel about it [I've read everything but the last two character sketches]. It didn't grab me in the way a normal 'great' novel does, but there are moments and aspects of it that keep gnawing at me. And there's something about the whole project that I found quite charming.
Posted by ana kata (Member # 5666) on :
He's just returned to the monastery after his vacation, with his new diplomatic mission he's been given. I am definitely interested now and involved, though it's still certainly not what I'd call a page turner. I wondered when he talked about the students writing "lives" of themselves as characters in different time periods, if this life of Knecht is not just such a life written by Hesse about himself at this time in the future. He really is a good writer, and thinker, I think, though his dislike of so many things rather worries me. He seems to virulently dislike a lot of things that I think merit instead a sort of affectionate neglect of notice. Does he strike anyone else that way?
It's thank goodness not turning out to be a 'dire warning' sort of speculative fiction book. It's more akin to Kazantzakis' dynamic opposition of the ideal, the mental, versus the concrete or physical. Zorba and the Boss, or Buddhist thought versus Christian thought. Not really sure where he's going with the Catholicism. I wonder if Knecht isn't going to become profoundly religious before the end?
Posted by Deirdre (Member # 4200) on :
I'm a little ways past that, but not by much. He's back from his second trip to the monastary, and doing...um...I don't quite remember. Preparing for some glass bead tournament or something. I set it aside for awhile again, but I'll try to knock out another hundred pages or so this weekend.
I like your idea about the novel being Hesse's life in another time. I don't know enough about the author to say much about it, though.
What did you think Hesse is being so negative about? Aside from the introduction, his attitude strikes me as ironic, but not overly critical. More ambivolent than anything, I think. My first impressions were negative, but mostly because the first chapter brought back bad memories of my Bach-obsessed piano teacher and the fits she'd throw when I forgot to do my theory homework. Also, I was sick on my vaction, and that put me in a pretty cranky mood. But now that I'm picking up on more of the irony and ambivalence in the tone, novel's become a lot more interesting ot me. Not exciting, but interesting.
I love the idea of academic discourse as a game. It seems very apt. I also like the way he presents the interactions between the spheres of his world: Castilia, the Church, and the realm of secular politics.
[ October 03, 2003, 06:43 PM: Message edited by: Deirdre ]
Posted by ana kata (Member # 5666) on :
I was thinking of Hesse as a whole, on the virulent dislikes. Just the overall tone I feel from him in which I may, in fact, be mistaken. From all of his work I've read so far he seems to feel, for instance, a virulent contempt for the bourgeoisie, their lifestyle, their way of interacting with the world, their very existence. But perhaps others don't get that feeling from him as I do. He also seems rather dismissive bordering on contemptuous for people whose intellects he feels are not pure. Those who have ambition or some other quality admixed, perhaps. This saddens me. I wish I could show him an affectionate regard or even an affectionate disregard or benign neglect for such. But, alas, dear Hermann is already dead. That also saddens me.
[ October 04, 2003, 03:20 AM: Message edited by: ana kata ]
Posted by blacwolve (Member # 2972) on :
*wonders off to read the book, which she has to write an essay on next Friday*
Posted by blacwolve (Member # 2972) on :
I just finished the main section, and am starting the first character sketch. What really helped me to pick up on a lot more in the story was reading the foreword by someone else. I didn't know much about Hesse going into the book, so the foreword just pointed out some trends in his writing that made things much much more clear.
I found the novel was really hard to read when I started, but the more I read the more it took possession of me. It's been in my thoughts constantly, and I haven't really been able to do anything else. I also really enjoyed the poetry at the end. I don't generally enjoy poetry, but this was very clean and eloquent.
I'll wait to say anything about the actual content of the story until I know someone else has finished, to avoid spoilers.
Posted by Zalmoxis (Member # 2327) on :
I'm ready too, bw. But am waiting for ak and Deirdre. How about lma and Raia -- you guys still in? Anybody else?
Also: Feyd, I hope you join the discussion as well.
Posted by ana kata (Member # 5666) on :
I'm reading his letter to the magisters asking to be released. So I'm getting close to the end. I too am enjoying it a lot and thinking about it all the time. I'm glad we chose this one! Go ahead and spoiler away, though. Don't wait for me. I'll catch up! Posted by Feyd Baron (Member # 1407) on :
I'll certainly join in, although I'll need to reaccquire my copy of the book before I do so in too much detail.
Glad y'all stuck with it, it felt like an uphill battle there for awhile.
Feyd Baron, DoC
Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
I don't know how I missed this thread. Sigh! Coincidentally, I started reading "Das Glasspearlenspeile" about the end of August, then classes started and I haven't had time for it in weeks. I guess I'll have to speed it up. I just don't read german very fast. Maybe I should get an English translation but I did so much want to read it in German.
Posted by Zalmoxis (Member # 2327) on :
Not that I know this for a fact, but...
It seems to me like Mann's _The Magic Mountain_ -- the kind of work that would be nice to read in German but would take so much effort that I don't know if it'd be worth it. I mean the prose is akademisch enough -- I can't imagine how heavier it must be auf Deutsch (and I'm too lazy to try at the moment). If I'm going to read something in the original, I want the prose to be more poetic or the voice to be more strong -- but that's just me.
Posted by blacwolve (Member # 2972) on :
Ok, um, what do we do know? I've never done one of these before. Posted by Raia (Member # 4700) on :
I'm still in, I need to have the book finished by monday. More then.
Posted by ana kata (Member # 5666) on :
You know? This is super cool! I'm so excited! I never dreamed so many people would actually read the book! A first!
Posted by ana kata (Member # 5666) on :
<wails> He killed him!
I'm desolated!
Why did he have to do that? I was so happy for him and excited. I could feel how great it was for him to finally be on the right road at last. I could tell how right everything felt for him now. Why did he have to just die like that? Can anyone explain that to me? Posted by blacwolve (Member # 2972) on :
I thought it was sort of like, that was his final transcendence, he couldn't go any farther, so it was ok for him to die. Does that make any sense?
Posted by blacwolve (Member # 2972) on :
*sighs*
I feel like I'm discussing with myself.
*sighs*
Posted by Feyd Baron (Member # 1407) on :
Any chance of setting a time to discuss this in either Parachat, or an AIM chat?
Feyd Baron, DoC
Posted by blacwolve (Member # 2972) on :
Sure, as long as I'm at home.
Posted by blacwolve (Member # 2972) on :
Well, I mean, you can do it even if I'm not, but I would prefer it if I was.
Posted by ana kata (Member # 5666) on :
Well, I thought we were going to discuss it here! Will you at least keep a transcript and post it, maybe? I can't be available for chat, I'm pretty sure, and I'd love to hear what people say.
I do partly feel that it followed that it was an ending that was a new beginning, in a way. Yet he was just getting started with the boy. I just felt it was an abrupt thing. It was as though it were an abortive thing. And there must be an artistic reason for it, since Hesse is not just some hack saying "okay, it's the end let's kill him off".
I feel it very personally. He was on the right path at last, then before he even began to accomplish anything he was cut off. I want to understand why the author would do that. It matters to me a lot. Does it feel to the rest of you that this was the right ending? Is there some way for me to be reconciled to it? Please tell me what you think.
Posted by Zalmoxis (Member # 2327) on :
I don't know if I buy it -- but I think that what Hesse is trying to say is that his death would mean more, have a greater impact on the boy, than any attempts at formal pedagogy. That what he needed to teach Tito was not 'things' but rather an attitude, an approach to life.
The question is how does Knecht's death do this? I can't answer that for the moment because I don't have my copy of the book with me.
Posted by ana kata (Member # 5666) on :
I'm reading the three lives now. I'm in the middle of the first life. I think perhaps these will be the key to understanding the main story, as they're likely to be succinct retellings, I'm guessing. Perhaps you are right about Knecht being a sacrificial victim in some way since that is a major theme in this first life.
Posted by Zalmoxis (Member # 2327) on :
Even if everyone isn't 100% finished, I think that we could start with a few things (forgive me if I sound like an English prof):
1. What did you think of the first section of the book, the discussion on the Glass Bead Game (in terms of both tone and content)? Was the background presented important for the later narrative of Knecht's life or did it get in the way? Why? Why not?
2. What did you think of the idea of the glass bead game itself? How do you picture it? [do a google search for it and you'll find people who have tried to create one].
3. What irritated you most about the account of the early years of Knecht's life (let's say up until things get going with his assignment to feel out Father Jacobus)? What did you find illuminating or charming?
4. Music and meditation play an important role in the education of the Castalian's and the formation and centering of Knecht's character. Do you buy it? What seemed to be missing (if anything)? Do you think Hesse's views are mimiced by the importance these matters hold for the Castalians or are there parts of the novel where a more ironic attitude slips through? --- How's that to get going? I can do more if these don't interest people. Or ask your own questions. But I do think that it'd be good to not get in to discussing the ending until we've treated with the beginning at least a bit (although Hatrack will go the way it will so I'll respond to whatever folks want to talk about).
EDIT: 'isn't finished' not 'is finished.'
[ October 15, 2003, 11:15 PM: Message edited by: Zalmoxis ]
Posted by blacwolve (Member # 2972) on :
I'm super swamped right now, so I probably won't be able to respond until this weekend, but I like those questions.
Posted by Deirdre (Member # 4200) on :
I'm still in; I've just been having computer problems.
I should be able to join the discussion some time next week.
Posted by Deirdre (Member # 4200) on :
Sheesh.
Don't unearth any groundbreaking new insights without me or anything.
Where is everyone?
<--very nearly back online
Posted by ana kata (Member # 5666) on :
I'm finished with all of it now but it's one of those books that it takes a while to decide what you think of it. I read the introduction by the non-author, too, and so found out what someone else thought of the book. I only ever read those after I've read the book myself cause I've found they can spoil things for me, particularly if my own reading of what the book is about is very different from the introducer's.
1. What did you think of the first section of the book, the discussion on the Glass Bead Game (in terms of both tone and content)? Was the background presented important for the later narrative of Knecht's life or did it get in the way? Why? Why not?
For me the whole introduction could have been skipped. It was way too much exposition, and could have been replaced with an appropriate paragraph or two here and there as the Glass Bead Game came up in the course of the story. The introducer said it was supposed to be a joke, an illustration of the excessive pedantism of scholars set apart from life like those in Castalia. I wonder if it wasn't also something of a joke on his readers. A way to discourage the glib and non-serious among them, or to give them a bit of a tweak on the nose?
2. What did you think of the idea of the glass bead game itself? How do you picture it? [do a google search for it and you'll find people who have tried to create one].
It's quite interesting. I see it as a sort of like jazz improvization but with more than just music involved. Symbolic logic, prepositional calculus, and all the various systems from math, of course, but also the language of art, if there were some way to codify that and incorporate it, and also economics, literature, every field of human endeavor would be represented. I still see the central metaphor as being music, though. It struck me that when he discussed great thinkers, musicians, etc, he very heavily weighted the Germans. As though civilization were Germans, then a few other footnotes. I love Hesse and also Goethe, Bach, Beethoven, lots of Germans who have done so many great things, but I did get a feeling of bias there. Is that the same bias that all the people of the world have for their own history, their own culture, and their own past? Or is it something that we are starting to get beyond in the 21st century that people were very much still caught up in at the start and middle of the last century?
3. What irritated you most about the account of the early years of Knecht's life (let's say up until things get going with his assignment to feel out Father Jacobus)? What did you find illuminating or charming?
I came to see the book in terms of what was happening in the world around Hesse at the time he was writing. I love his fascination with Eastern religion, and I do think he was one of the first westerners to sort of bring that influence into our canon. Kazantzakis introduced me to Buddhism when I was 14, and I can't remember when he was writing. Perhaps it was before Hesse. When was the Greek civil war? (My knowledge of history is abysmal. I apologize. Y'all please try to educate me as well as you can so I can catch up.)
The thing I found worrisome or sad about the first part of the book was the narrator's lack of affection for the people who were only dabblers in intellectual pursuits. His sort of despair that so few were real thinkers in our (Hesse's now) age. Though there were plenty of reasons for fearing the end of everything around the time of World War II, I think it's a perennial mistake throughout all time that old people think the world has gone crazy now, that these young people today are shallow and not serious and lack any restraint or discipline, that in the olden times we did things so much better. I never can sympathize with any such hand wringing, whether I read it in Herodotus or Shakespeare or when I heard my grandfather say it, or when people say it now. It's just human nature to feel that way.
The truth is that all times are actually crazy. That's what makes life interesting. Things only seem sensible when time and memory give a distance from them, and afterwards when things have worked out better than people's worst fears. That and everyone's childhood seemed a better time to them than their old age. They didn't worry about things when they were children. Their parents and grandparents did the worrying then.
4. Music and meditation play an important role in the education of the Castalian's and the formation and centering of Knecht's character. Do you buy it? What seemed to be missing (if anything)? Do you think Hesse's views are mimiced by the importance these matters hold for the Castalians or are there parts of the novel where a more ironic attitude slips through?
Yes, I think Hesse was saying with this novel that a contemplative life is incomplete. I think he was a great lover of music and of meditation and reading and thinking. Yet it isn't enough. One also must live. To me that's what he meant.
The death of Knecht upset me very badly. I felt very much the liberation and joy that he felt at the end when he seemed at last to be on the right path. To tell you the truth I was identifying with it, as I feel that same way since my decision to go to Iraq. Then when he barely was able to start, and had accomplished so far nearly nothing, to have him die like that really upset me. It seemed prophetic, in a way. I do think now, after having read the three lives (all three of which I really loved) and the preface which told something Hesse said in a letter, that Knecht's death was meant as a sort of sacrifice. That his death was not meaningless, nor his life, but that both together were going to accomplish (or help accomplish) what he set out to do. Yes, I think that's what he meant and I am reconciled to it. So be it.
[ October 25, 2003, 07:13 PM: Message edited by: ana kata ]
Posted by ana kata (Member # 5666) on :
I don't want to cut discussion short on this book. I loved this book and there's a lot there to discuss. But I wonder if anyone has any suggestions for the next book we read. I'm reading Chaim Potok's In the Beginning and it's wonderful and sad. It's about a very intelligent boy, David, who grew up in New York after the first world war, during the depression, and though the second world war. He is one of those wonderful Potok characters who is rather quiet and thoughtful but whose feelings become one's own. It's being rather a sad book, so far, but very full of thought and life and spirit, as well as pain and sorrow. I recommend it highly. In the Beginning.
[ October 25, 2003, 06:27 PM: Message edited by: ana kata ]
Posted by ana kata (Member # 5666) on :
Here's my full suggestion list again, for ease of reference. With more added at the end.
[ October 29, 2003, 08:51 AM: Message edited by: ana kata ]
Posted by ana kata (Member # 5666) on :
I finished In the Beginning. It was great. So sad but so alive.
Let's pick another. Anyone want to?
Posted by ana kata (Member # 5666) on :
We have several page-turner action type books on the list. I expect both the Dumas ones and the Walter Scott are like this. (I can't personally vouch for any of them as I only picked books I haven't yet read.) I'm pretty sure the Wilkie Collins and Umberto Eco are too.
We have some classic Science Fiction. I've heard many many people say Forever War was one of the best SF novels ever, and I've heard great things about C. J. Cherryh. The Kim Stanley Robinson sounds particularly wonderful.
We have kids books. Artemis Fowl is great fun. I've already read two of the three of those. The Prydain Chronicles were recommended by no less than Dante, and His Dark Materials by nearly everyone.
I'm sort of leaning toward The Satanic Verses myself, as I read an article by him and was quite impressed with his writing. Also any book that makes someone wants to murder the author is surely worth reading, isn't it?
We have writers from many countries from which to choose. Take your pick.
Or if nothing on this list appeals to you, then feel free to make other suggestions.
[ October 29, 2003, 08:55 AM: Message edited by: ana kata ]
Posted by ana kata (Member # 5666) on :
Ever since I've been at hatrack, my list of books I want to read has grown far faster than I've been able to shrink it again by reading them. I actually am worried and upset about the possibility that many of the books I once thought I really wanted to read, I just forgot about completely before I ever got around to them.
I'm also worried that there is no possible way I can finish all the good books there are in the world by the time I'm dead. That's good and bad. On the one hand it would be terribly sad to think that one had come to the end of all the good books that had ever been written. The same awful way it feels to complete the works of an author you particularly love, it would be, only far far worse. But on the other hand, it means I will inevitably die before I get to read some really great books. Which ones do I miss? How can I possibly pick? Waaaaaaah!
So we'd better get going and read, read, read! We don't have any time to lose!
[ October 29, 2003, 09:08 AM: Message edited by: ana kata ]
Posted by Mintieman (Member # 4620) on :
I think I'm very slightly late *looks sheepish* but I havent been able to get the book till recently, please keep the discussion going!
Posted by ana kata (Member # 5666) on :
Not a problem! I hope you will let us know what you think.
Reading back over what I said before, I'm a little more hopeful that perhaps the attitude of disappointment with the shallow intellectual lives of the people in the age of Feuilletonism was not Hesse's own feeling, but rather a feeling held by the ivory tower scholars he was poking fun of. I definitely now think the first bit was partly a joke on his cultish readership. How many of them would buy the book and put it on their shelf unread? I wouldn't have gotten through that part had several people not told me it got better.
When I googled for the correct spelling of feuilletonism, I came across some of the people hailing TGBG as a flagship of their thought, and they ARE a bit, ummm..... how would one say it? There seems to be a lot of enthusiasm for the book among a diverse crowd. Some of them a bit wacko, perhaps, do you think?
I want to add a question to the list. How do you think the book works as speculative fiction? Did he get it right, or not?
[ November 04, 2003, 08:24 AM: Message edited by: ana kata ]
Posted by Mintieman (Member # 4620) on :
1. What did you think of the first section of the book, the discussion on the Glass Bead Game (in terms of both tone and content)? Was the background presented important for the later narrative of Knecht's life or did it get in the way? Why? Why not?
I actually didnt mind the first section too much, it was a tad boring, but the I found the concept of the game pretty fascinating, I dont think it was in the way as such, but I can see a lot of people being put off the book because of the beginning.
2. What did you think of the idea of the glass bead game itself? How do you picture it? [do a google search for it and you'll find people who have tried to create one].
I found the game to be a fascinating idea, although I still dont think I've grasped how you actually play it I thought of it as a way to show ideas, and change and adapt them.
How it would look, I have no idea, apart from the fact that it would probably be quite beautiful
3. What irritated you most about the account of the early years of Knecht's life (let's say up until things get going with his assignment to feel out Father Jacobus)? What did you find illuminating or charming?
I would have like a more personal account of jospeh, instead of the slightly detatched one we got, but it does have its merits. The passionate talk he has with the music master, about truth, I found very charming
4. Music and meditation play an important role in the education of the Castalian's and the formation and centering of Knecht's character. Do you buy it? What seemed to be missing (if anything)? Do you think Hesse's views are mimiced by the importance these matters hold for the Castalians or are there parts of the novel where a more ironic attitude slips through?
I think he respects music and meditation, but is disdainful of the detatchment that these people have with reality, being intellectual for the sake of it is one thing, completely ignoring reality for the sake of there own sheltered lives is another.
The death of Joseph Knecht, although constantly hinted at, was still distressing, and although I think he himself was fine with the entire thing, it did annoy me that what he had set out to do didn't seem to be finished, or even show signs that tito would carry on his work.
Posted by Svidrigailov (Member # 5147) on :
If we are taking new book suggestions... might I suggest Crime and Punishment. I also believe it is online as an E-book for people who have not the money to buy a hardback or paperback copy.
Brother, tell them I went to America.
Posted by ana kata (Member # 5666) on :
I expect everyone's already read Crime and Punishment. It looks as though you have too. But I'd sure be happy to read it again and talk about it if people want. I'm about due for another reading, since it's probably been a couple of years now.
Posted by Zalmoxis (Member # 2327) on :
anne kate alluded to this, but for your entertainment:
Funny, funny stuff. ----- I have things to say about Hesse's novel, but need to find time to say them.
As far as next goes -- I'd prefer to not do Crime and Punishment, but am pretty open to whatever folks want to read.
Posted by Mintieman (Member # 4620) on :
Eco sounds intriguing, as long as there arent massive chunks of text in other languages Posted by Deirdre (Member # 4200) on :
Just a few quick thoughts...
I love the way he handled Knecht's death (the first one) as much as ak and others seem to hate it. Everything about it seemed perfect--not just the sacrifical aspect but also how it relates to the whole individual vs community theme Hesse develops throughout. And the way he dies--Death by Water--how perfect is that?
Ummm...that's all for now. More later.
Posted by Zalmoxis (Member # 2327) on :
On the game itself:
I too found it hard to envision the game because it is presented in such abstract terms (which is kind of the point). I kind of like the idea of being able to see patterns and linkages across disciplines, but the good postmodernist in me objects to the idea that one could somehow encode these ideas in symbols [the glass beads] without substantially changing them [structuralism has this same problem which is why it was quickly abandoned for post-structuralism]. Such reification doesn't work for me. But then again, I've always been much more comfortable with narratives than formulas.
As far as its place in the book, I can think of no better way to symbolize the specialized, often arcane, terminology and rarefied air of elitist academics [that term may be redundant to some, but I've met/read academics whose work is approachable and interesting].
The one thing I did like is the description of Knecht and [his overwrought friend] planning his glass bead game presentation. It's neat to read about productive creative relationships and how they work.
Jazz is a great analogy, ak, and I agree with your thoughts on Hesse's overemphasis on German culture. I think it's a bias that many nationalities have, but in my experience, the French and the Germans are the most prone to it. The English are a little quicker to acknowledge their debt to other sources and celebrate non-national figures.
Finally, what I think would be more interesting would be if they did the glass bead game and then tried to translate it into a scholarly-artistic work (or works). That could be kind of cool -- re-enriching the beads and seeing where the pattern leads when it comes to contextualized work.
Posted by ana kata (Member # 5666) on :
The overwrought friend was supposed to be Nietzsche, according to the introduction. He was supposedly the archetype of the academician who was unsuited for any sort of ordinary life.
Posted by blacwolve (Member # 2972) on :
I'd like to read Crime and Punishment, my dad tells me it's really good. I don't see why we can't be discussing a few books at the same time in here, so if not everybody wants to read the same book it won't matter.
Posted by Deirdre (Member # 4200) on :
My problem with the jazz analogy is that it's hard to imagine the Castilians tolerating anything so spontaneous and individualistic that it would resemble improvisation. I saw it as something much more ordered and impersonal, like a fugue.
Posted by Zalmoxis (Member # 2327) on :
On the "The General Introduction," the narrative, the rhetoric of the Castalian narrator, and Knecht's death ("The Legend"):
While the distancing technique created by the presence of the Castalian narrator of the novel interferes with our reading of the novel as we are accustomed to read most novels, I think that it's crucial to its impact. The main narrative takes us through the major events of Knecht's life in relation to Waldzell. It is given, ostensibly, to explain why Knecht eventually leaves. There's no tension in this regard -- we are told from the beginning that that's what the narrative leads to. The main narrative is unabashedly hagiographic. How often are we told about Knecht's brilliance? Every step in Knecht's career is shown to be a natural progression and -- importantly -- clear to all the Castalians if not always clear to Knecht himself. Great care is taken to preserve Knecht as not only a brilliant man, but also the finest practitioner of Waldzell customs and disciplines and as an upholder of the hierarchy.
Why present this main narrative in this form? For one, it allows for plenty of telling -- we are mainly told that Knecht is great. That fact is crucial to the narrative, but if Hesse had tried to show that through the point of view of Knecht, it would have been much more difficult to establish, and impossible to establish and still create an understanding of Knecht's inherent humility. The distance, and it's a Castalian distance (Knecht finally remains opaque to the Order -- they simply cannot understand his decision to leave), created allows us to both buy into the myth of Knecht, to see him as a great man, but also to sympathize with him. We understand his dilemma through the rhetoric of the narrative.
Finally, as the novel takes up the story of Knecht after he leaves the Order, the Castalian intrusions leave and we're given a more "straightforward" narrative (and note that it's one of unknown authorship). After being immersed in the main narrative, we're all of sudden getting more of Hesse, in my opinion, and we move through the story more easily as readers until we get to the shocking conclusion -- Knecht's sudden death -- and the switch in point of view to Tito, as he comes to the realization of this not quite rational but overwhelming guilt, a guilt that demands.
It's important that readers feel a shock that is powerful enough that we understand Tito's response (which, naturally, is key to the whole novel). All the previous material has pushed us towards the fact of Knecht's separation from Castalia. We experience a sort of catharsis as Knecht makes the decision to leave and a sort of excitement as he enters the real world (our world). For him to leave it so soon and in such a way (death by water as Deridre reminds us -- do you have more on that for us, D?) is shocking and almost incomprehensible. At least it was for me, and I gather for the rest of you who have posted so far. But again, the shock and its implications, are beautifully set up by the previous "main narrative" and the Castalian rhetoric and the distance created that keeps Knecht sympathetic in our eyes, but distant. He really only breaks through as real character in the final moments -- and in his three lives.
A few words about the three lives:
As anne kate has mentioned, the three lives are critical to our understanding of the ending, dealing as they do with mentors and students, society's relationship to men of knowledge (and I'm sorry this book is all men -- another of Hesse's blindspots), and most importantly, the concept of sacrifice and transmission of the mantle of authority and wisdom. The first story, I think, most directly and profoundly demonstrates this as Knecht, the Rainmaker, sacrifices himself in order to regain the villagers faith in the Rainmaker's ways, and to establish Turu as his heir and discredit Maro.
----- A thought on the next book: Where's Danzig? He started this most excellent of all threads. I think he should decide or at least heavily influence our decision.
Posted by ana kata (Member # 5666) on :
"most excellent of all threads" I concur. Posted by Mintieman (Member # 4620) on :
I just finished "My name is Asher Lev" by Chaim Potok.
Sad, but inspiring, I thought it was great.
Is In the beginning as good?
Posted by ana kata (Member # 5666) on :
The two Asher Lev books were my favorites of all. In the Beginning was also wonderful, though it was very sad in some ways.
Did you know about "The Gift of Asher Lev"? It is the sequel to "My Name is Asher Lev".
Here is a good Potok page I found. He was such a great guy.
Posted by ana kata (Member # 5666) on :
"Fundamentalism is a western religious reaction to Darwin. The text freezes, ideas freeze, because the alternative is a real terror, the terror that we are not the center of the universe and that it's all a series of odd accidents." -Chaim Potok
He sees Jewish, Christian, and Islamic fundamentalism as being similar in this way. That's just fascinating to me. What a brilliant man!
Posted by ana kata (Member # 5666) on :
quote:College People: Do you think it is possible for a religious group to be tolerant and allow for plurality of views and still maintain a clear identity and sense of purpose? If so, how do you do that?
Chaim Potok: That's a very serious problem. Within Judaism itself you will find a significant spectrum of difference in terms of responses to your question. For example, Jewish fundamentalist, the very orthodox, will say, "No, it is not possible. There is one reading of the Jewish tradition; all other readings are wrong."
To the extent to which a Christian group is a fundamentalist group, I would suspect that it would have to respond in the same way. But Judaism has a complex variety of readings, especially in the modern period. Rabbinic Judaism is much more than its specific orthodox or fundamentalist component. And this permits the Jew to maneuver with a very richly textured tradition that is more than 3,000 years old.
I can see where the problem would come into very serious play with specific Christian fundamentalism s I would suspect, though, that if a Christian fundamentalism looks deeply inside itself, it will find a spectrum of readings. It is inconceivable to me that a million or three million or half a million human beings will think and feel precisely the same way on any single subject. I think that we all finally ought to admit that while a system of thought has boundaries, the boundaries can be narrow or wide. Even the most fundamentalist of fundamentalism, if it really looks, will find fairly wide boundaries.
The trick then is: How do you respect one another? The alternative is disruption of a planet. It is no longer just burning people at the stake, throwing people out, excommunicating people or fighting wars. Either the species learn to listen--to listen--or we will simply disappear as a species. Now I submit that the price you pay for listening is far less than the price you pay for not listening and disappearing.
I'm not altogether certain that a fundamentalism of necessity has to argue that it is the only reading of the human experience in order to stay alive. There has got to be another way of articulating one's commitment to a body of ideas--a way other than saying, "I'm right and everybody else is wrong." And that's what we have to learn in the next half a century to a century, otherwise we are just not going to be around to talk to ourselves anymore.
From an interview with College People, found here.
[ November 13, 2003, 08:55 AM: Message edited by: ana kata ]
Posted by ana kata (Member # 5666) on :
<bumping my beloved thread>
Posted by Danzig (Member # 4704) on :
Zalmoxis, sorry for not replying earlier. This thread kind of evolved into a discussion of works that I am not sure could be considered classics. In any case, I am more interested in older works. But I am not going to try to make this thread conform to my original vision for it. If a work I consider to be a classic becomes the next one we read, then I will drop back on in. So basically I do not care if people would rather comment on contemporary literature instead of classics, but I will probably not participate, especially if I have not already read the book. So I propose the Oresteia, but if no one else is interested, that is fine with me.
Posted by ana kata (Member # 5666) on :
The Orestia sounds good to me. Anyone else interested?
Posted by Zalmoxis (Member # 2327) on :
Sure. I couldn't really remember what it was, but a quick google search refreshed my memory -- Aeschylus.
Is there a particular translation you'd recommend, Danzig? Lattimore? The somewhat recent Ted Hughes version? Shapiro/Burian? [this last one intrigues me because it purports to capture more of the syntax and imagery of the original Greek]
I probably won't be able to finish as quickly as with the Hesse book, but I'd be happy to join the discussion when I can. ---- Also: I think the nature of this thread is such that if Glass Bead Game readers still have comments or things to discuss we could continue to do that. Please don't think that the discussion is closed just because we've moved onto another book. For instance, we haven't talked at all about the Music Master and very little about Father Jacobus.
Posted by Zalmoxis (Member # 2327) on :
This happened quicker than I thought it would.
I have my copy of the Oresteia and will start reading it tonight on the train home. My library only had the Ted Hughes translation [well, there were several transaltions from the 50s from people I had never heard of so I passed those up].
If I hate it, I will seek out a different translation.
Also: this edition has no forward, notes or anything. That's fine for a first reading, but if you have any good secondary materials [books, articles, or Web-available stuff] that you like and find valuable, Danzig, please post them. I like that kind of stuff.
Posted by ana kata (Member # 5666) on :
Thought I would post some links that might be helpful. The e-text is available here. This page seems to have lots of great links too, including e-text from MIT, and lots of study sites.
Perseus classics online has them listed separately under Aeschylus (the Oresteia is composed of the three plays, Agamemnon, the Libation Bearers (Choephori), and the Eumenides).
Here is another e-text version from University of Adelaide.
[ December 02, 2003, 01:39 PM: Message edited by: ana kata ]
Posted by Danzig (Member # 4704) on :
I have no recommendations for translations- the only one I even know of who is any good is Lattimore. Since you have the Hughes translation I will probably buy that, if I buy anything at all. I might just use ak's links.
Also due to schoolwork it may take me a while to finish reading, so if I am not around I promise I have not forgotten, I am jsut busy.
Posted by BobbyK (Member # 5970) on :
Greetings, I'mma elbow my way in here.
I have very little to no classical lit under my belt, so, this looks like an awesome way to start! Count me in.
Are we all going to go with the same translation, for consistancies sake? Or whatever you can get your hands on, for convieniences sake? Either is fine by me, but am wanting to be "on page" if we're conforming.
Posted by Zalmoxis (Member # 2327) on :
A new recruit. Excellent.
I think trying to impose one translation would be difficult so I suggest you read whichever one you'd like. But do let us know which one you choose and once you get into it what you think about it so that other readers can make informed decisions.
I don't care what translations we all read -- I just want them to be decent because my past experience suggests that there's nothing worse than a bad translation of a classic work.
Posted by BobbyK (Member # 5970) on :
What constitutes a bad translation? I ask someone please walk me through this, because I'm very new to the entire subject. My comprehension exceeds my read literature.
Posted by BobbyK (Member # 5970) on :
*bump*
Posted by Zalmoxis (Member # 2327) on :
That's a great question, B. What constitutes a bad translation probably varies depending on the like and the dislike of the reader -- although there can be translations that are just awful because the translator not only takes liberties with the text but also gets things just plain wrong because he or she doesn't understand the original language [and perhaps more often the original context of the work] well enough.
I'd say -- if you have access to a library that has either the Ted Hughes or the Lattimore translation, read one of those. Otherwise read on the the e-texts that ak links to above.
------------- Comment on the text itself:
I forgot. How could I forget? I can't believe I forgot. I approached this text somewhat blankly -- all I knew is that it was about Agammemnon after the fall of Troy. I remembered the names Paris, Helen, Priam, Achilles, Menelaus, Clytemnestra, Cassandra. I knew that Agammenon was going to be bringing Cassandra home with him and figured the play might be about that -- but still I didn't know where the drama was going to come from.
Then I read the first pages -- the watchman's monologue -- and then the chorus -- and then the part about Calchas and the two birds and the hare and a faint memory stirs -- and then the phrase "the bloody footprints of Clytemnestra" -- and it all comes back in full horror -- Iphigenia. How could I forget? I can't believe I forgot.
The Herald is about to enter. So far the translation seems fantastic -- vivid, lively. Some well-turned phrases and piling on of the imagery but not too 'poetic' in that 'look-at-me-I'm-a-poet" way.
Posted by BobbyK (Member # 5970) on :
Golden! thank you very much.
I need to return some books anyways *cringe*
Baaaaaaad citizen!!
Thanks for the inclusion.
Posted by ana kata (Member # 5666) on :
My translation is the same one that's on all the online texts. I read something else translated by Ted Hughes. Some Horace? What was it? I forgot. Anyway, I didn't care for his translation much so let me know if you think his Oresteia is good. The translation makes all the difference in the world, particularly for things written in verse. The Iliad is like a totally different work in my several different translations. So the ideal thing is to read some out of as many as you can find, and pick the one you like best, I think.
Posted by Zalmoxis (Member # 2327) on :
For those interested -- a translation comparison of the last part of the Watchman's speech at the beginningof "Agamemnon":
Ian Johnston's translation (ak's first link above)
quote: For my part, I'll start things off by dancing, treating my king's good fortune as my own. 40 I've had a lucky dice roll, triple six, thanks to this fiery signal . . . .
[His mood suddenly changes to something much more hesitant and reserved]
But I hope the master of this house may come home soon, so I can grasp his welcome hand in mine. As for all the rest, I'm saying nothing. A great ox stands on my tongue. But this house, if it could speak, might tell some stories. I speak to those who know about these things. For those who don't, there's nothing I remember.
E.D.A. Morshead (last link in ak's post above)
quote:For I can say, My master’s dice fell fair— Behold! the triple sice, the lucky flame! Now be my lot to clasp, in loyal love, The hand of him restored, who rules our home: Home—but I say no more: upon my tongue Treads hard the ox o’ the adage.
Had it voice, The home itself might soothliest tell its tale; I, of set will, speak words the wise may learn, To others, nought remember nor discern.
The translation available at the Tufts site (Herbert Weir Smythe is listed as editor)
quote: for my lord's lucky roll I shall count to my own score, now that this beacon has thrown me triple six.
Ah well, may the master of the house come home and may I clasp his welcome hand in mine! For the rest I stay silent; a great ox stands upon my tongue --yet the house itself, could it but speak, might tell a plain enough tale; since, for my part, by my own choice I have words for those who know, and to those who do not know, I've lost my memory.
Robert Browning (also from the Tufts site)
quote:For, that my masters' dice drop right, I'll reckon: Since thrice-six has it thrown to me, this signal. Well, may it hap that, as he comes, the loved hand O' the household's lord I may sustain with this hand! As for the rest, I'm mute: on tongue a big ox Has trodden. Yet this House, if voice it take should, Most plain would speak. So, willing I myself speak To those who know: to who know not -- I'm blankness.
Ted Hughes (not available online)
quote: The gods have blessed our master. They've blessed me too. They've made me the bearer of the news. Only let them bring the King home safely. Let me prostrate myself at his feet And then -- what follows, Better not to think about it. Only the foundation of this house Can tell that story. Yes, The tongue that could find The words for what follows -- that tongue Would have to lift this house's foundations. Those who know too much, as I do, about this house, Let their tongue lie still -- squashed flat. Under the foundations.
Posted by ak (Member # 90) on :
Zalmoxis, which do you prefer?
I think I like Robert Browning's, but I can't say why, exactly. Maybe only because I love him.
Posted by Zalmoxis (Member # 2327) on :
I haven't read much of the Browning translation, but it seems pretty good -- clean, good syntax, nice imagery and rhythm.
The Morshead one strikes me as atrocious.
I really like the Ted Hughes translation I'm reading. If I had read the plays in the original Greek or had read several other translatins before, I'm sure that I would find it annoying -- repetitive, too abrupt, too stripped down, etc. But for me, the somewhat staccato minimialist flow works. It makes it easy to get what's going on and it really showcases some of the amazing imagery and trenchant phrasings.
Posted by Zalmoxis (Member # 2327) on :
For the record -- I have not abandoned this thread. I hope others haven't as well.
Here's my proof in the form of, imo, provocative passages from each of the three plays (Ted Hughes translation).
From _Agamemnon_. The Chorus confronts Clytemnestra after she murders her husband and wonders at her act:
quote:Where is the right and wrong In this nightmare? Each becomes the ghost of the other. Each is driven mad By the ghost of the other. Who can reason it out? Reason, fails, mind is a casualty Of this bloody succession.
From _Choephori_. The Chorus urges Orestes to seek revenge against his mother:
quote:Now let your will, like your grief, Be stronger than life. The past is stronger than life -- Nothing can alter it. Now let that terrible past, like a tempered weapon, Become your will. Be fearless, to rip open The future's secret. The justice you bring Is stronger than life. Assume that strength.
From _The Eumenides_. Athene to the Chorus of Furies, distraught over Orestes' acquittal:
quote:You call for justice. But God speaks through me. Only I, Pallas Athene, Possess the key That unlocks the thunderbolt of Zeus. But the time of brute force Is past. The day of reasoned persuasion, With its long vision, With its mercy, its forgiveness, Has arrived.
Posted by aka (Member # 139) on :
Wow.
I'm so glad this thread has not been abandoned! Zalmoxis rules!
Posted by Zalmoxis (Member # 2327) on :
Another for the record:
A quote frome Slate movie critic David Edelstein's review of "Troy":
quote:(The fate of King Agamemnon will make those who know The Oresteia —- merely the cornerstone of Western drama —- scratch their heads.)
I have no objections to changes in the story made for Petersen's film -- although I probably won't be seeing it anytime soon. Not because I'm against seeing it but because it's not high up on the list at the moment.
But here's the thing:
The story of Troy is all well and fine and epic. But if you want the whole story, you really need to read the three plays that form the Oresteia. Not only is the work a thrilling, bloody, tragic family drama, but it is an important bridge between the world of Troy and the world of Western Civilization as we know (and live) it. It hints at the move from the tribal to the civic.
Posted by Zalmoxis (Member # 2327) on :
One more quote from The Orestia
Athene commends the Chorus of Furies for agreeing to drop their blood vengeance claim against Orestes and integrate themselves into the life of Athens:
quote:The presence of God in persuasion Draws the poison fangs of evil, Undoes the knotted mesh of brooding hatred. In the gentle combat of persuasion Good wins over good with goodness And none lose.
The Chorus replies:
quote:There is no hope nor future For a land Whose mind is split Into two, and where each half Strives only to destroy the other. Give Athens a single mind, a whole mind, As a marriage Gives to two strangers One child.
Posted by ak (Member # 90) on :
Zal, that's an awesome quote! <Edit: Both are awesome but I was referring to the second one.>
I abandoned the Orestia for the moment and not sure when I'll finish, but I am digging your commentary on it.
My friend Sasha who got me to actually read Kafka instead of keeping the wrong idea I had of him and so ignoring him forever, has started a story which I really like. If he writes more I may ask him for permission to show it to you and get your commentary on it. To me it seems as much above the routine aspiring writer stuff as Saudade's art is above the typical college art student productions. Which may mean that I'm biased but I don't think so.
[ August 09, 2004, 11:33 PM: Message edited by: ak ]
Posted by Zalmoxis (Member # 2327) on :
Sure.
The first one's free.
After that...
Posted by ak (Member # 90) on :
I know what you mean. I mean, there are Tolstoy novels I haven't read yet. So it's hard to make myself read the works of aspiring writers. Posted by Zalmoxis (Member # 2327) on :
Oh, I don't mind reading the works of aspiring writers. It's just that my analysis is, well, you know, worth its weight in platinum (I'd say gold, but I much prefer the coolness and weight of platinum). .
Posted by ak (Member # 90) on :
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
If we exhaust all readily available works (yeah right) from before then, perhaps we can later decide to consider it.)![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
I just looked for it, and apparently I sort of threw it away, a little bit. Raia, if you're reading this thread, can you post it?
![[Angst]](graemlins/angst.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Cry]](graemlins/cry.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Blushing]](graemlins/blushing.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)