@droopus Asimov and Hemingway, yes. Didn’t think of Steinbeck. Hated having to read him so much. Hemingway was OK, since all three times were Old Man & the Sea. Made its simple. Never required to read Asimov, but read plenty. Still praying for a Foundation tv series.
@simplersimon Give Steinbeck a chance. Asimov is my favorite author, but Steinbeck is amazing, but NOT Of Mice and Men, and Grapes of Wrath is way too depressing. But East of Eden is one of the most amazing books, philosophically, I’ve ever read. You really don’t know who the main character is until the last pages and the entire book revolves around the varied interpretations of a single word in the bible. But it is a bad ass book, and many people didn’t read it because it’s a bit too sexual for most schools. I know people don’t read a lot anymore (including me) but East of Eden is just an amazing book.
They would ruin Foundation on TV, though I see hints of Daneel Olivaw in the Alien series with the robot David. Asimov predicted so much of what we use today.
I’ve read works by some of the these authors, but not all of them. The only one I could say I am embarrassed to have not read is Jules Verne, but only because some of this books were made into wonderful movies. Going to the source material would be grand.
Perhaps the only classic author who’s writing style isn’t excruciating to read. Beyond tolerable in fact, it’s quite excellent. Well conceived stories written in a style that’s still relatable today.
Most of the writers on the list have created phenomenal stories, but the style in which the stories are told is cumbersome to read. This diminishes my appreciation of the work.
I just finished “The Complete Sherlock Holmes” and it took all I had to get to the last. I’ve tried three times to finish Melville’s epic, but it’s too cumbersome to focus on for more than a few days. Same with Twain, Mary Shelly, Poe, Stoker… it’s almost like I have to translate every sentence into a language my simple brain can digest. But London… London stories are relatable in a style that doesn’t interfere with the tales. Love me some Jack London.
I’d switch out Bram Stoker for Robert Louis Stevenson (since this list is pretty heavily oriented to the 19th century) and maybe throw in Sir Walter Scott as well. Stevenson is highly readable and was a lot more than just “Treasure Island,” while Stoker was a lot less than “Dracula,” imho.
Yeah, I think Dracula is a great book, but it definitely has an odd writing style that takes some getting used to, whereas Stevenson’s stories are approachable and genuinely fun.
I’m not embarrassed to admit that I haven’t read Oscar Wilde or O Henry, but I am a little embarrassed to admit that I haven’t been all that impressed with the Jules Verne stories I’ve read. I thought the main character in Journey to the Center of the Earth was kind of a wimp. Jim Hawkins would have kicked his butt. ☺
Interesting thing about this list: it’s mostly “classics” that I read voluntarily, not the ones that I was told to “appreciate” in highschool, which left me with a lasting distaste for what I thought of as “literature”.
Never could get into classic sci-fi, like Wells. The prose is too big of a turn-off. I was enjoying Lucifer’s Hammer kind of recently (probably old enough to squeeze into some historically-oriented category). Forgot to finish it, now that you mention it… I do remember enjoying whatever no doubt bastardized adapted-and-abridged-for-children Jules Verne books I read at a young age.
And Sherlock Holmes and Dracula were shoe-ins. Fun books. I hope. There might be a non-zero chance that I read them again, now that I’ve forgotten everything from the first time around.
Dumas. Not that I’m particularly embarrassed, though. Just 'cause he was the only one that was never required reading in high school. Since it’s not actually possible for me to be embarrassed not to have read any of the others, I think I have to default to him.
I second the above suggestions of London, Stevenson, and Dickens, and would also like to add Upton Sinclair.
If you’re going to include Bram Stoker on this list you should most certainly include Mary Shelley. Frankenstein was richer, deeper, and all-around better than Dracula, and written in a much more accessible prose. You see echoes of it in a massive number of modern stories. Plus it would be nice to have at least one female author represented.
Read them all, though many not by choice. Some that I read not-by-choice that I would have been happy to have missed: William Faulkner’s The Sound and the Fury, James Joyce’s Ulysses (which was walk-in-the-park easy after the Faulkner), Sterne’s The Life and Opinions of Tristram Shandy, Gentleman, a couple of Louisa May Alcott books (which my brain refuses to dredge up titles for, because I would much prefer to forget them), and a host of others I prefer to simply pretend I never read. My brain is just happier forgetting them. I do remember Steinbeck’s The Pearl just because it was used in a speed reading class where we were instructed to scan one page per second, then write a summary of the book. Most of the class got most of the main points of the book after a less-than-two-minute scan. (I recommend this method for any Steinbeck.)
When i was in school the nuns always said it doesn’t make a difference what you read as long as you read. We probably shouldn’t be embarrassed about NOT reading something, as long as we ARE reading something. I think the “what” is unimportant.
@f00l I was always bothered by “The History of” in the title. Isn’t a work detailing events in the past by definition a history? It seems redundant. And no I haven’t read it…
It may have been a scholarly naming convention of the Georgian Era. I don’t know.
Also, I suppose, given a writer’s POV and approach, a serious book with a title of The Decline And Fall Of The Roman Empire might refer to a history, or not. Analysis or political take, or opinion POV, etc.
@f00l Hah! If you could slog through Gibbon, then you need a copy of Frazer’s The Golden Bough on Kindle. It works as both a cure for insomnia, and as a way to rid yourself of irritating people (and mostly all of the other people) at a party by quoting some of the stranger customs. Even better, keep a copy of Arnott’s Eating Your Auntie Is Wrong: The World’s Strangest Customs. Quote stuff from Arnott but attribute it to Frazer. Since it is highly likely that no one around you has actually read Frazer, and are unlikely to check, it will make you sound both erudite and mentally unbalanced. I’ve always found that to be a useful combination.
I am half way through Anna Karenina by Leo Tolstoy. It is rather good and very interesting historical picture of Moscow and Petersburg high society. I was tricked into reading it by the app called Serial Reader. It’s free and it sends you a chapter a day. Maybe someone on Meh posted about this app before? I can’t remember how I found it. Dipped my toe into the water and decided to pay $2.99 for the app to get the next chapter(s) without waiting and change the terrible font/color/size they use… I’m thinking this forum discussion will help me decide what to try next after I’m finished with it. Anna Karenina
@2many2no Ah, yes. Also called “Remembrance of Things Past” (a title I prefer, even though it’s less common). I’ve danced through that, here and there, but there comes a time when fresh air and the sweet smells of outside beckon, and the shallow meanderings of Proust pale in comparison. Make no mistake; not everyone is worth reading. It’s good to make the attempt, but have no sorrow in setting it aside.
Here’s an amusement from a bit of one of the Amazon descriptions: “Marcel Proust whiled away the first half of his life as a self-conscious aesthete and social climber. The second half he spent in the creation of the mighty roman-fleuve that is Remembrance of Things Past, memorializing his own dandyism and parvenu hijinks even as he revealed their essential hollowness.”
I enjoyed The Sound and the Fury (mentioned above) by Faulkner, and long ago threw into the recycle anything and everything by Steinbeck (and still need to scrub my brain, just thinking of his turgid and unpleasant prose).
I was sad to not find Rudyard Kipling in the poll, or already brought up here. I grew up on the Jungle Book, Just So Stories, and Rikki Tikki Tavi. In the hall closet at our home growing up my Dad had put up high shelves along the ceiling, and on them were two full sets of 1920’s printed Kipling hardcovers (with the reverse ‘good fortune’ swastika emblazoned on them), plus Carl Sandburg’s Lincoln, Le Morte d’Arthur, Whitman, Robert Louis Stevenson, and many others. Plus the Hastings House Prince Valiant series for interim light reading We had to get permission to take those books down (because ladder and small kids) but Dad was tall and could reach them; it was worth it.
During the Desert Shield/Desert Storm days when the milbloggers came onto the scene, I heard from so many soldiers about the copies of Barrack-Room Ballads and Deartmental Ditties that they carried with them, some handed down one or two generations, because Kipling ‘got it’. I never really will, because I didn’t serve, but the glimpse a civilian can get from Kipling is terrifying and awesome.
And I still get chills down my spine reading “The Gods ofthe Copybook Headings”…
I’m not embarrassed to have not read some of those authors.
I’ve only read stuff by a couple of those authors. I’m not embarrassed about it. I got bored just reading the names in the poll.
@awk You know a good couple’a books? Leo Brodie’s Forth guides from the '80s (available online these days) with their whimsical illustrations…
@brhfl I loved the Leo Brodie books.
Dumbass and Doyle.
Public school for the win!
I was able to read the poll question – I feel superior to about 13.7% of the global population.
You left out Steinbeck, Hemingway and Asimov? (I named my kid after an Asimov character.)
@droopus Asimov and Hemingway, yes. Didn’t think of Steinbeck. Hated having to read him so much. Hemingway was OK, since all three times were Old Man & the Sea. Made its simple. Never required to read Asimov, but read plenty. Still praying for a Foundation tv series.
@droopus I hope his name is Robot.
@dave Her. Bliss.
@simplersimon Give Steinbeck a chance. Asimov is my favorite author, but Steinbeck is amazing, but NOT Of Mice and Men, and Grapes of Wrath is way too depressing. But East of Eden is one of the most amazing books, philosophically, I’ve ever read. You really don’t know who the main character is until the last pages and the entire book revolves around the varied interpretations of a single word in the bible. But it is a bad ass book, and many people didn’t read it because it’s a bit too sexual for most schools. I know people don’t read a lot anymore (including me) but East of Eden is just an amazing book.
They would ruin Foundation on TV, though I see hints of Daneel Olivaw in the Alien series with the robot David. Asimov predicted so much of what we use today.
@droopus
How do you shoot yourself in the shoulder?
I dont know, but them easterners are pretty clever
@simplersimon Travels with Charley is a really good read and quite different from other Steinbeck. Of course, a lot of his stuff is pretty darn good.
@droopus I more or less grew up on Asimov, Heinlein, and Clarke.
I guess that explains a lot.
@2many2no I recently digested my firs Heinlein book, The Rolling Stones. I enjoyed it quite a bit and I am looking forward to exploring more Heinlein.
@ruouttaurmind I liked The Door into Summer.
Also any of the Lazarus Long books are good, but be aware, they’re the entrance to the rabbit hole.
@2many2no Heinlein is the bestest author ever.
@ruouttaurmind You are in for quite an adventure with the Heinlein books. I envy you.
Read all, don’t feel superior for it, tho. Was surprised Dickens missed the list. Didn’t read him until college. Hate him so much.
I read some Poe in High School. Otherwise, none of the above.
Same applies to Steinbeck.
What the hell, doth yonder poll is broke…a rose by any other name would smell as sweet, but would doth still be lacking the great name Will!
OK I don’t know my doth from my don
but any list of authors that is going to make me feel inferior better have Shakespeare on it! Classic or not!
Good night, good night parting is such meh sorrow
That I shall say good night till it be morrow
@mehbee To sleep, perchance to Dream. Nite nite.
@SSteve perfect!
@mehbee all sound and fury, signifying nothing…
@Fuzzalini yay!! love that one too
Edgar Rice Burroughs?
@dickie541 If you’re going to include Burroughs you have to include Wells. And maybe Huxley.
@moondrake
*Huxley
Still in copyright.
I’ve read works by some of the these authors, but not all of them. The only one I could say I am embarrassed to have not read is Jules Verne, but only because some of this books were made into wonderful movies. Going to the source material would be grand.
@TheTexasTwister When people talk about authors who successfully projected future technology, Verne is always the first that comes to mind.
Jack London is missing from the list?
Perhaps the only classic author who’s writing style isn’t excruciating to read. Beyond tolerable in fact, it’s quite excellent. Well conceived stories written in a style that’s still relatable today.
Most of the writers on the list have created phenomenal stories, but the style in which the stories are told is cumbersome to read. This diminishes my appreciation of the work.
I just finished “The Complete Sherlock Holmes” and it took all I had to get to the last. I’ve tried three times to finish Melville’s epic, but it’s too cumbersome to focus on for more than a few days. Same with Twain, Mary Shelly, Poe, Stoker… it’s almost like I have to translate every sentence into a language my simple brain can digest. But London… London stories are relatable in a style that doesn’t interfere with the tales. Love me some Jack London.
I’d switch out Bram Stoker for Robert Louis Stevenson (since this list is pretty heavily oriented to the 19th century) and maybe throw in Sir Walter Scott as well. Stevenson is highly readable and was a lot more than just “Treasure Island,” while Stoker was a lot less than “Dracula,” imho.
Yeah, I think Dracula is a great book, but it definitely has an odd writing style that takes some getting used to, whereas Stevenson’s stories are approachable and genuinely fun.
I’m not embarrassed to admit that I haven’t read Oscar Wilde or O Henry, but I am a little embarrassed to admit that I haven’t been all that impressed with the Jules Verne stories I’ve read. I thought the main character in Journey to the Center of the Earth was kind of a wimp. Jim Hawkins would have kicked his butt. ☺
Interesting thing about this list: it’s mostly “classics” that I read voluntarily, not the ones that I was told to “appreciate” in highschool, which left me with a lasting distaste for what I thought of as “literature”.
Never could get into classic sci-fi, like Wells. The prose is too big of a turn-off. I was enjoying Lucifer’s Hammer kind of recently (probably old enough to squeeze into some historically-oriented category). Forgot to finish it, now that you mention it… I do remember enjoying whatever no doubt bastardized adapted-and-abridged-for-children Jules Verne books I read at a young age.
And Sherlock Holmes and Dracula were shoe-ins. Fun books. I hope. There might be a non-zero chance that I read them again, now that I’ve forgotten everything from the first time around.
Dumas. Not that I’m particularly embarrassed, though. Just 'cause he was the only one that was never required reading in high school. Since it’s not actually possible for me to be embarrassed not to have read any of the others, I think I have to default to him.
I second the above suggestions of London, Stevenson, and Dickens, and would also like to add Upton Sinclair.
@dannybeans I loved Dumas as a kid and read everything I could get my hands on. Athos, Porthos and Aramis had a profound influence on me.
If you’re going to include Bram Stoker on this list you should most certainly include Mary Shelley. Frankenstein was richer, deeper, and all-around better than Dracula, and written in a much more accessible prose. You see echoes of it in a massive number of modern stories. Plus it would be nice to have at least one female author represented.
Read them all, though many not by choice. Some that I read not-by-choice that I would have been happy to have missed: William Faulkner’s The Sound and the Fury, James Joyce’s Ulysses (which was walk-in-the-park easy after the Faulkner), Sterne’s The Life and Opinions of Tristram Shandy, Gentleman, a couple of Louisa May Alcott books (which my brain refuses to dredge up titles for, because I would much prefer to forget them), and a host of others I prefer to simply pretend I never read. My brain is just happier forgetting them. I do remember Steinbeck’s The Pearl just because it was used in a speed reading class where we were instructed to scan one page per second, then write a summary of the book. Most of the class got most of the main points of the book after a less-than-two-minute scan. (I recommend this method for any Steinbeck.)
When i was in school the nuns always said it doesn’t make a difference what you read as long as you read. We probably shouldn’t be embarrassed about NOT reading something, as long as we ARE reading something. I think the “what” is unimportant.
Didn’t read the last 3. But felt superior anyway.
The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire
By Edward Gibbon
Vol I-VI, published 1776-1788
variously attributed to King George III or Henry, Duke of Gloucester, upon receiving a volume of Gibbon’s book.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_History_of_the_Decline_and_Fall_of_the_Roman_Empire
This E-book version $1.99 at Amazon for all 6 volumes.
https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B00HIM09MM/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1502471060&sr=1-1&pi=AC_SX236_SY340_QL65&keywords=edward+gibbon&dpPl=1&dpID=51imBYZZZfL&ref=plSrch
One edition is 3980 pages in hardback.
@f00l I was always bothered by “The History of” in the title. Isn’t a work detailing events in the past by definition a history? It seems redundant. And no I haven’t read it…
@tomdina
It may have been a scholarly naming convention of the Georgian Era. I don’t know.
Also, I suppose, given a writer’s POV and approach, a serious book with a title of The Decline And Fall Of The Roman Empire might refer to a history, or not. Analysis or political take, or opinion POV, etc.
@f00l “Possibly something a bit more poetic?” - Samwell Tarly to Archmaester Ebrose
@tomdina
@f00l
@f00l Hah! If you could slog through Gibbon, then you need a copy of Frazer’s The Golden Bough on Kindle. It works as both a cure for insomnia, and as a way to rid yourself of irritating people (and mostly all of the other people) at a party by quoting some of the stranger customs. Even better, keep a copy of Arnott’s Eating Your Auntie Is Wrong: The World’s Strangest Customs. Quote stuff from Arnott but attribute it to Frazer. Since it is highly likely that no one around you has actually read Frazer, and are unlikely to check, it will make you sound both erudite and mentally unbalanced. I’ve always found that to be a useful combination.
@rockblossom
Have not read Gibbon. Hope to read a lot more Roman history someday. Perhaps not his tho.
Did The Golden Bough once so long ago that I barely remember it.
I like your idea. A lot.
Have read some.
I am half way through Anna Karenina by Leo Tolstoy. It is rather good and very interesting historical picture of Moscow and Petersburg high society. I was tricked into reading it by the app called Serial Reader. It’s free and it sends you a chapter a day. Maybe someone on Meh posted about this app before? I can’t remember how I found it. Dipped my toe into the water and decided to pay $2.99 for the app to get the next chapter(s) without waiting and change the terrible font/color/size they use… I’m thinking this forum discussion will help me decide what to try next after I’m finished with it. Anna Karenina
This the one I started, but may never finish.
Marcel Proust In Search of Lost Time 4300 pages.
(English translation, my French ain’t that good.)
@2many2no Ah, yes. Also called “Remembrance of Things Past” (a title I prefer, even though it’s less common). I’ve danced through that, here and there, but there comes a time when fresh air and the sweet smells of outside beckon, and the shallow meanderings of Proust pale in comparison. Make no mistake; not everyone is worth reading. It’s good to make the attempt, but have no sorrow in setting it aside.
Here’s an amusement from a bit of one of the Amazon descriptions: “Marcel Proust whiled away the first half of his life as a self-conscious aesthete and social climber. The second half he spent in the creation of the mighty roman-fleuve that is Remembrance of Things Past, memorializing his own dandyism and parvenu hijinks even as he revealed their essential hollowness.”
I enjoyed The Sound and the Fury (mentioned above) by Faulkner, and long ago threw into the recycle anything and everything by Steinbeck (and still need to scrub my brain, just thinking of his turgid and unpleasant prose).
@Shrdlu Let’s see if this works…
/giphy TL;DR
No, that doesn’t look like Proust
I was sad to not find Rudyard Kipling in the poll, or already brought up here. I grew up on the Jungle Book, Just So Stories, and Rikki Tikki Tavi. In the hall closet at our home growing up my Dad had put up high shelves along the ceiling, and on them were two full sets of 1920’s printed Kipling hardcovers (with the reverse ‘good fortune’ swastika emblazoned on them), plus Carl Sandburg’s Lincoln, Le Morte d’Arthur, Whitman, Robert Louis Stevenson, and many others. Plus the Hastings House Prince Valiant series for interim light reading
We had to get permission to take those books down (because ladder and small kids) but Dad was tall and could reach them; it was worth it.
During the Desert Shield/Desert Storm days when the milbloggers came onto the scene, I heard from so many soldiers about the copies of Barrack-Room Ballads and Deartmental Ditties that they carried with them, some handed down one or two generations, because Kipling ‘got it’. I never really will, because I didn’t serve, but the glimpse a civilian can get from Kipling is terrifying and awesome.
And I still get chills down my spine reading “The Gods ofthe Copybook Headings”…
I voted O Henry, because even though I was a very loyal devote of his candy bar, I never read his stuff.
Why didn’t you include that well-known Lovable Homosexual, ‘Bard of Avon’, Willy Shakespeare!!
Not yet a classic, but if you know him and dont get a quiver/choke-up…
Spider Robinson
…you need to suffer through Crime and Punishment