Classics and the Western Canon discussion

The Random Generator has rambled through our bookshelf, the moderators have delved deeply into their psyches and emerged with their recommendations, and so we now have a selection to offer for the next group read.

This list, purely in alphabetical order by author, will be posted here for discussion and, in a few days, will be posted as a poll. The list is somewhat lengthy, so I expect that we will most likely need a run-off poll.

Lobbying is definitely permitted, but those who lobby for a book but then don't participate in the discussion if it wins are subject to severe negative looks from the moderators.

Any of these works should make for an interesting discussion. There are a few challenging texts here, if we feel up to them, and one or two which might be a bit less strenuous after The Magic Mountain, though our discussion of that book is proceeding so well and richly that it’s obvious that we can successfully read challenging books, so we shouldn’t let ourselves be scared off by them.

If you can't find at least one book in this list you are eager to read and discuss, well, I guess there are people who don't like chocolate, either. Poor souls.

The list:

Adams, The Education of Henry Adams
Dickens, Our Mutual Friend
Frazer, The Golden Bough
Nietzsche, Beyond Good and Evil
Ovid, Metamorphoses
Plutarch, Lives of the Noble Grecians and Romans
Rousseau, Emile, or On Education
Shelley, Frankenstein, or The Modern Prometheus
Spinoza, Ethics
Tolstoy, War and Peace
Trollope, Can You Forgive Her?
Voltaire, Candide

All twelve volumes of The Golden Bough?

David wrote: "All twelve volumes of The Golden Bough?"

Eek! I had no idea. It was on the bookshelf and the random generator just picked it.

Given that the 12 volume edition from the Cambridge Library Collection is $468, you can safely assume that I'm not buying it.

It appears that even Frazer issued multiple editions; according to Wikipedia the first edition was 2 volumes, the second edition was 3 volumes, and the third edition was the 12 volume edition (with a supplement issued 22 years later).

Frazer and his wife produced a 1 volume abridged edition about 10 years after the 12 volume edition.

The edition that was put on the Bookshelf is the Oxford Worlds Classics abridged edition. This apparently adds back in some of the more controversial material about Jesus that Frazer and his wife omitted from their abridgement.

I don't normally approve of abridged editions, but in this case, since the author himself issued an abridged edition, and since I doubt anybody here is prepared to buy or read the entire 12 volume set, I am making a unilateral dictatorial decision that if it is selected, we will use the one volume Oxford World Series abridgement as the standard text. (Of course, if it is chosen, anybody who wants to is welcome to read the whole 12 volumes and fill us in on what we're missing. Do I take you question to be an implication that you wish to take on that role? [g])

Everyman wrote: "David wrote: "Do I take you question to be an implication that you wish to take on that role?"

Well, given that I haven't read all of the abridged version, maybe not (Frazer's original abridgement runs to 900 pages in Penguin Classics, and I would imagine the Oxford one to be about the same size). But I do want to read the whole shebang one day, so the suggestion is tempting. This is not, by the way, an invitation for everyone to suddenly start voting for The Golden Bough.

It is certainly a fascinating read, from the bits I have studied, and I'm sure would lead to much fruitful discussion in whichever version.

Does this help?


The Education of Henry Adams by Henry Adams
Our Mutual Friend by Charles Dickens
The Golden Bough by James George Frazer
Beyond Good and Evil by Friedrich Nietzsche
Metamorphoses by Ovid
The Lives of the Noble Grecians and Romans, Vol 1 by Plutarch
Emile: Or On Education by Jean-Jacques Rousseau
Frankenstein, or The Modern Prometheus by Mary Shelley
Ethics by Baruch Spinoza
War and Peace by Leo Tolstoy
Can You Forgive Her? by Anthony Trollope
Candide by Voltaire

I was up for anything but Frankenstein or War and Peace until the Golden Bough discussion and now I am intrigued enough to favor it. The reviews on GR indicate that people have struggled with this work.

Has anyone read it completely?

Thank you, Susan.

I go War and Peace, I put it down after reading book 1, even though I was rather enjoying it, to catch up on other stuff. Voltaire would be my second choice. The Golden Bough, I would only prefer if we went with the unabridged, which we can probably get used online much cheaper than Everyman's manufacturer's suggested retail price. I am not saying I would vote for that one, only that I should prefer the unabridged if it comes down to it. I must say, I am enjoying the Magic Mountain, but my translation is a little tough. But, I'm determined.

My two cents: We have several times in the past discussed the desirability of reading Ovid's Metamorphoses together since so many of the other things we read here draws on that material.

Use Look Inside here to see the table of contents:

http://www.amazon.com/Metamorphoses-P...

Jonathan wrote: "The Golden Bough, I would only prefer if we went with the unabridged, which we can probably get used online much cheaper than Everyman's manufacturer's suggested retail price...."

Jonathan -- 12 volumes? How long would you be willing to spend on it? What is the appeal of investing that much time? Sounds a bit like reading all of Proust consecutively to me -- and I am only skeptical, not cynical, in asking.

For the TOC of the single volume edition, see Look Inside here:

http://www.amazon.com/The-Golden-Boug...

Patrice wrote: "Although I'd like to read all of Proust, I can't help help thinking of all of the time that would be lost. ;-)"

Balanced by the pleasure that would be gained? I think I'm at the third book this year. I would not want to do it consecutively, however.

Patrice wrote: "Good for you! Let me know if it's worthwhile. I hope you know I was joking. Isn't the translation of the title "In search of Lost Time"?"

As worth it as any well written book. One just makes choices. Certainly better than Swamplandia! and probably less fun than Vanity Fair or Cranford. Yes, I recognized your clever play on words! ;-)

For those who might consider the availability of an e-book version of our works as one element in which to vote for, I have checked all the selections, as far as I could.

g means there's a free gutenberg edition available. These are almost all available in any e-book edition you want, including but not limited to txt, html, kindle, and epub (Nook et. al.) For non-English texts, sometimes the Gutenberg translations are excellent, but they are seldom current translations since they have to be out of copyright.

k means there's a kindle e-book version available, which may be a gutenberg based edition or may be a different, more recent translation or edition for which there is a charge.

I have not checked Barnes and Noble for Nook editions because I have found that many of their free editions are from the Internet Archive and are generally unusable, being mostly uncorrected OCR copies with multiple text problems that for me, at least, make reading them physically painful.


The Education of Henry Adams - g, k
Our Mutual Friend - g, k
The Golden Bough -
g in other editions, but not the Oxford World Classics we would be using
k in both Oxford World's Classics edition and other editions
Beyond Good and Evil - g, k
Metamorphoses - g (but I think modern translations are preferable)
k in both older and more modern translations
The Lives of the Noble Grecians and Romans - g, k
Emile: Or On Education - g, k (also in French)
Frankenstein, or The Modern Prometheus - g
Ethics, Spinoza - g, k
War and Peace - g, k
Can You Forgive Her? - g, k
Candide - g (also in French), k (also in French)

The poll for the next read is up.

I will be announcing it to the full membership of the group. However, recognizing that there have in the past on occasion been books supported by a number of people who have never been active participants in teh group, the moderators reserve the right NOT to judge the poll winners solely by number of votes but also to evaluate the record of participation of the voters, so that if one selection is supported primarily by active participants, and another, with more votes, is supported primarily by non-participants, the former may be declared the winner (or placed in the run-off) against the latter.

This seems consistent with the policy that this group is intended as an active discussion group.

If you are reading this post and learning about the poll here rather than just from the general notice, it is highly likely that you are an active participant, so that your vote will be particularly important.

Nothing jumps out at me as something I am eager to read. Have read about half of them and don't want to do any again. Maybe Beyond Good and Evil?? Sorry, not much help.

There is a great edition of Metamorphoses here where we can actually appreciate the dactylic hexameter and maybe discuss some choices derived from meter, as appears in Horatii Carmina due to the use of Alcaic and Sapphic stanzas.

Lucas wrote: "There is a great edition of Metamorphoses here where we can actually appreciate the dactylic hexameter and maybe discuss some choices derived from meter, as appears in Horatii Carmina due to the us..."

I wish my high school Latin were still up to reading it.

I could discuss some passages in latin and provide a translation and context if you want me to. I hope my english is up to part though (since is not my first language).

There are three Kindle versions of Frankenstein. If you get the free one, that enables you to also get the Audible version for a pittance, if I remember right. You don't have to be an Audible member to get it this way.

Hm, no book convinces me really except War and Peace, but I know it already. After all, I think will need a pause after MM. Maybe I will read the Divine Comedy along with the old discussions in order to understand better the new Dan Brown novel.

Plutarch's Lives is strange: These are all short biographies ... for future polls I suggest: Goethe, The Italian Journey (I know that too, but you will like it!)

Thorwald wrote: "Hm, no book convinces me really exceptd..."

I understand. There have been several books selected by the group that didn't convince me, and in fact which I would never have read on my own.

I read them initially as a sense of duty, as a moderator, but got really interested in as the discussion developed. Les Miserables, for example, I had to work hard to convince myself to start reading, but I found it was a pretty amazing book, and it became an even more amazing discussion.

As for a pause after MM, you get an automatic 2 (occasionally 3) week break with our Interim Read policy, if that's long enough.

If you think I'm trying to convince you to stay with us, well, I am! I've greatly enjoyed your participation in this discussion, and would love to have you become a regular here. But if not, well, I do understand that we all have to set priorities for our time and interests.

By "summer," what do we mean? Will there be interim reads before beginning? I ask because I will be away for part of the middle of the summer and won't vote unless I think I'll be around to participate...

Thorwald wrote: "for future polls I suggest: Goethe, The Italian Journey (I know that too, but you will like it!) "

Anyone is entitled to add to our bookshelves books that they would like to see chosen for vote. But please be sure to edit the book so that it is not on the "read" shelf, which is the default, but is on the "to-read" shelf. Books that show up on the "read" shelf without having been formally read confuse people who think we have read it, and also they will never show up as possible selections since those are chosen entirely from the "to-read" shelf.

Edit: it probably goes without saying, but I'll say it anyhow, that books should fit the criteria of being classics in the Western Canon tradition.

Everyman wrote: "books should fit the criteria of being classics in the Western Canon tradition."

Maybe this is in the FAQ, but what are the criteria for the Western Canon?

I personally don't think "Frankenstein" or "Can You Forgive Her?" belong to the Canon, with all due respect to the members who added them.

Frankenstein is absolutely part of the canon! We may think of it today as simply a "horror story" (though it was among the first in that genre) but it is actually a complex psychological drama that also addresses big questions about science, man's intervention, origins, etc., etc. Widely anthologized, studied, critiqued with an influence on many works that followed. (And I was not the member who added it, lest my comments be construed as self-defensive!)

Nemo wrote: "I personally don't think "Frankenstein" or "Can You Forgive Her?" belong to the Canon, with all due respect to the members who added them. ..."

Nemo -- I presume you are using a source other than your "I personally don't think" to define the Canon?

I did go to the Great Books of the Western World list as presented at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Bo....

It is true neither Mary Shelley's Frankenstein nor Anthony Trollope's Can You Forgive Her? is among those books.

Among the authors/poets I found "missing" was Percy Bysshe Shelley, critically regarded as among the finest lyric poets in the English language. (Mary's husband.) Although Thomas Mann was present, Buddenbrooks rather than The Magic Mountain was included.

I also checked the program at St. Johns, the only university program for which I was successful in doing so on a rather short bit of research. Like the Great Books, the site did not include Frankenstein nor Trollope (in any form). (Nor Thackeray.) However, Mortimer Adler's books on Lifetime Reading Plans include these authors and additional works, as do the Great Books reading programs (different than the Great Books of the Western World series).

I consider our moderators our arbitrators on these matters for this Classics and the Western Canon board, but it is interesting to hear the views and concerns that members have. (The 21st Century Literature board has just had such a discussion.)

See also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_...

Correction: The Thomas Mann book among these was Death in Venice ! 4/16
Corrections 2 & 3 The Lifetime Reading Plan should be credited to Clifton Fadiman, with "The New" shared with John S Major. Mortimer Adler is well known for How to Read a Book: The Classic Guide to Intelligent Reading. Still 4/16.

My careless day. Sorry. Thanks to all for the links and comments in this thread. More another day on the science-related writings and the recent proposed changes on school curricula in the U.S.

Lily wrote: "Nemo -- I presume you are using a source other than your "I personally don't think" to define the Canon? "

Yes and no.:) It actually goes along with my original question, "What are the criteria for the Western Canon"? Are they based on the personal opinions of the members or are there some sort of objective (by which I mean observable) standards? Or perhaps it is a mixture of both?

I think the Western Canon is based roughly on the Great Books of the Western World, Great Books and Harvard Classics. None of them include "Frankenstein" or "Can you Forgive Her". The Magic Mountain is included in the Great Books series, BTW.

Kathy wrote: "Frankenstein is absolutely part of the canon! ..."

There is nothing wrong with being "self-defensive". :) It's good to learn what others think about these works. When you say, "addresses big questions about science, man's intervention", does it address those questions in a way that is unique, original or universal?

Nemo wrote: "...The Magic Mountain is included in the Great Books series, BTW...."

Nemo -- Which Great Book series? [g]

The one I scanned was Great Books of the Western World (Encyclopædia Britannica)as presented here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Bo...

Volume 59 of the second edition reports inclusion of Thomas Mann's Death in Venice , but I find no other entry. (I added a correction to my msg 29 above.)

Incidentally, there is a thread labelled "What is a classic; what is the Western canon?" here: http://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/1...

It probably discusses at least some of the issues you posit. I haven't revisited it -- I had even forgotten it is here.

Lily wrote: "Nemo wrote: "...The Magic Mountain is included in the Great Books series, BTW...."

Nemo -- Which Great Book series? [g]"

The second of the three series I listed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Books

Kathy wrote: "Frankenstein is absolutely part of the canon! We may think of it today as simply a "horror story" (though it was among the first in that genre) but it is actually a complex psychological drama that..."

I recall being surprised by the depth of Frankenstein when I read it a few years ago. It is a "horror story" all right. But the monster is not the monster.

Nemo wrote: "Lily wrote: "Nemo -- I presume you are using a source other than your "I personally don't think" to define the Canon? "

Yes and no.:) It actually goes along with my original question, "What are th..."

Though, there are writers that are not listed there that have been considered as part of the canon. For example Jorge Luis Borges, an author that Harold Bloom in The Western Canon presents as one of the 26 writers that are central to the canon and yet is not mentioned in any of the links you provided.

I question reading Rousseu's Emile as "Rousseau abandoned all of his children at a foundling hospital shortly after birth. His poor parenting received a great deal of ridicule and criticism, especially after Rousseau published Emile, which lays out theories on proper child-rearing and education." Lol!
Frankenstein could be interesting....and I love War and Peace but am not sure that I am up for a re-read. Thorwald's mention of Goethe's book interests me.

In any case, the list here takes care of itself. If someone feels something belongs to the canon, he/she can post it to the bookshelf, and if others disagree, they will not choose to read it!

Lily wrote: "I also checked the program at St. Johns, the only university program for which I was successful in doing so on a rather short bit of research."

A similar program is the one at St. Thomas Aquinas College.

http://www.thomasaquinas.edu/a-libera...

This is not a "vote" (since I probably cannot participate over the summer), but I'll give Henry Adams a plug. Hand-wringing about the "new" and terrifying technological state of the world, education, politics, women's issues, etc. which often reads as very contemporary, or at least relevant. I haven't read the whole thing, but have taught three different chapters to college freshmen--a tough haul for them in many ways, but I grew quite fond of it.
(P.S. I hope you will save Ovid for later, when I *can* join you...)

Lucas wrote: "...Jorge Luis Borges, an author that Harold Bloom in The Western Canon presents as one of the 26 writers that are central to the canon and yet is not mentioned in any of the links you provided...."

Many people on the cover of Western Canon are not mentioned in the Canon either. So many great books, so little time. :)

Kathy wrote: "In any case, the list here takes care of itself. If someone feels something belongs to the canon, he/she can post it to the bookshelf, and if others disagree, they will not choose to read it!"

But it's not that simple. Adding many non-canonical books to the shelf can reduce the chances of canonical books being read, like finding the needle in the haystack.

Interesting discussion!

I love the various lists (there is a nice list of lists at http://www.interleaves.org/~rteeter/g... )

But I also note that any set of books (I have both the Harvard Classics and the Great Books of the Western World) is necessarily limited. They have to limit themselves usually to one or at most a few shorter works of an author. For example, with Dickens the GBWW series has only Little Dorrit, whereas I would include basically all of Dickens's novels in the Canon, and I doubt that anybody would exclude Bleak House or Great Expectations from the Canon. Similarly, for Austen the GBWW has only Emma and for Eliot only Middlemarch, and while I agree those are their best works, one can hardly justify excluding all their other works from the Canon.

Personally, I take a fairly broad (though not I hope excessively so!) view of the Western Canon, at least as it pertains to this group. Without trying to give a specific definition, which would be impossible (any definition I tried to give, Plato would demolish in two pages of dialogue), very broadly I would suggest that this group should include those books which several generations, at least, of serious readers have read seriously.

If we consider Bacon's triage system ("Some books are to be tasted, others to be swallowed, and some few to be chewed and digested: that is, some books are to be read only in parts, others to be read, but not curiously, and some few to be read wholly, and with diligence and attention") those which are to be read with diligence and attention certainly belong here, those which are to be only tasted don't, and of those which are to be swallowed, well, it depends.

One criteria I am firm on is that I do not believe in the concept of "modern classic," at least for this group. I prefer books that were written before World War II, and have for most of their life been considered serious books; those books have stood the test of time. Certainly many worthwhile books have been written since then, but for me, they have not earned the right to be considered classics until they have proved their worth to several generations of readers. (One needs only go back to look at the past winners of various major literary prizes, such as the Nobel Prize for Literature to see how books that are considered in their day the best of the best can disappear totally within a few years.)

As the years pass I will probably need to get more flexible about that WWII timeline, but certainly I want a book, before it enters the Canon, to prove over time that it speaks not just to one or two generations, but to many generations of readers.

The general concept I like is that of the "Great Conversation" which was introduced to me (I'm not aware of its use before then) by Robert Hutchins. He talks of the conversation of thinkers and readers which has been going on since the beginning of literacy. This is why I consider, for example, Trollope to be in the Canon, because I find his work referred to and his ideas embedded in later works, so that he has a place in the conversation.

All of this, I agree, is a bit loosey-goosey. I really can't do better than agree with Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart, who wrote that "hard-core pornography" was hard to define, but that "I know it when I see it." A classic is hard to define precisely, but I have a pretty good feeling that the members of this group know it when they see it. Which is good enough for me.

I added some classics to the to-read bookshelf although I am not sure whether you all could accept them as classics. With Goethe and Schiller I am sure :-)
All books written before 1945.
Please check for relevance for this group, thank you!

Schiller and Hölderlin are nice additions! Schweitzer too. I'm not sure if they're Great, but I'm sure they're pretty good. :)

(I actually read Schiller's Aesthetic Education at St. John's, paired with Kant's Critique of Judgment. So as far as I'm concerned, Schiller definitely qualifies.)

Thorwald wrote: "I added some classics to the to-read bookshelf although I am not sure whether you all could accept them as classics. With Goethe and Schiller I am sure :-)
All books written before 1945.
Please che..."

I'm not familiar with any of them, but they'll do fine there, and if the random number generator picks any of them it will be up to the group to decide whether to vote for them. The only restriction is that they need to be available in English translation at a reasonable cost, and ideally in an e-book version for those who need for one reason or another to read in that format. I didn't check that.

Is it too much to ask that whoever adds to the bookshelf to write (or link to) a review of the book added, especially if it is not included in the Great Books or Harvard Classics series? The review can help when the time comes to vote.

Nemo wrote: "Is it too much to ask that whoever adds to the bookshelf to write (or link to) a review of the book added, especially if it is not included in the Great Books or Harvard Classics series? The review..."

That would be possible, and perhaps courteous, but if you just click on the title of the book on the bookshelf, you will get to its Goodreads page, which has a brief synopsis of the book and the reviews by GR members who have reviewed it. From that same page, you can also link directly, through the "online stores" pulldown menu, to the major booksellers and their reviews. So there's lots of information about the books available very quickly and easily.

Everyman wrote: "Nemo wrote: "Is it too much to ask that whoever adds to the bookshelf to write (or link to) a review of the book added, especially if it is not included in the Great Books or Harvard Classics serie..."

Yes, but those reviews don't tell me why the book belongs to the Western Canon. :)

Nemo wrote: "Yes, but those reviews don't tell me why the book belongs to the Western Canon. :) "

I suppose you'll next be wanting a definition of virtue. :)

Nemo wrote: "Is it too much to ask that whoever adds to the bookshelf to write (or link to) a review of the book added, especially if it is not included in the Great Books or Harvard Classics series? The review..."

I added always a short note in the "About" part. Reviews for these books should be available en masse ... if not on GR then on Amazon.com or in Google Books ...

PS: ... if not an entire Wikipedia article for each book!

Thomas wrote: "Nemo wrote: "Yes, but those reviews don't tell me why the book belongs to the Western Canon. :) "

I suppose you'll next be wanting a definition of virtue. :)"

Touche.

Nicely said, Everyman (@45) and Patrice (above). I have nothing to add to your definitions, though I did add Emily Dickinson to the bookshelf.

Patrice wrote: "I'm sure there are holes in this definition of "Great Books" but my personal definition is that the book must address universal themes. I love history but an account of historical events is to me,..."

Wonderful thinking in the first paragraph about universality and why it makes “Great Books” that they are not limited to time and space and that they have the capacity to appeal to us across cultures.

Did the “Classical” philosophers of the 17th and 18th Centuries put some doubts in your mind if their ideas are universal and applicable to you and our times?