Classics and the Western Canon discussion

Although we are still early in the discussion of Middlemarch, it’s not too soon to think about our next read, to give people time to find or borrow or buy the book we will be reading.

There was some discussion awhile back that we should choose something other than another 18th or 19th century novel, and move a bit earlier into the Canon. With this in mind, I ran our random number generator on our book list, but omitted anything later than 1700. Our generator came up with a delightful assortment of items, which is supplemented by nominations from the moderators.

Here’s the list. Any of these works should make for an excellent discussion. These are probably all books you have either already read or have intended to read but not yet gotten around to. Now’s your chance to read, or reread, these books – there isn’t a single one of them that isn’t worth rereading.

Before I actually post the poll for voting, I will leave the list here for a week or so for people to comment on or lobby for any of the works. Also, if some of these are not familiar to you, feel free to ask for a description of or an argument in favor of the work. Lobbying should be lobbying for a particular work or works, not lobbying against, please.

The works, in alphabetical order by author:

Aristotle, Nichomachean Ethics
Mill, John Stewart, On Liberty
Milton, Paradise Lost
More, Thomas, Utopia
Plato, The Republic
Sophocles, Oresteia
Virgil, Aeneid

I would love to read "Paradise Lost" by Milton. I just finished "Utopia" a few months back and found it a quick, enjoyable read, and read the last two years ago, but PL is one I could definitely use the help of the group to get through!

I'd love _Paradise Lost_ also. I haven't read it in decades.

Roger wrote: "I'd love _Paradise Lost_ also. I haven't read it in decades."

I'm trying to read it once a year now, so it would fit beautifully into my plans.

My vote also goes to Paradise Lost. High time I got to that!

I'm a little confused. Everytime I search for Oresteia I get this: The Oresteia: Agamemnon, The Libation Bearers & The Eumenides info for plays written by Aeschylus. Is this right or am I missing something?

Patrice wrote: "It's right Eliza. The Oresteia is a trilogy of three plays about Orestes."
Thanks!

I really want to read either Paradise Lost or Utopia. Both are high priority on my list for this year

Eliza wrote: "I'm a little confused. Everytime I search for Oresteia I get this: The Oresteia: Agamemnon, The Libation Bearers & The Eumenides info for plays written by Aeschylus. Is this right or..."

This is right. Traditionally, Greek drama was performed in sets of four plays, three tragedies and one satyr play. The Oresteia is the only complete set of three tragedies which has survived; all the other plays we have are single plays which were part of a trilogy. (Sophocles's Theban Plays, Oedipus Rex, Oedipus at Colonus, and Antigone, are often printed together as though they were a trilogy, but they're not; they were each part of a different trilogy, and weren't even written in the order of their events.)

So the Oresteia is, yes, a set of three plays that were meant to be performed together as a set.

"The Oresteia" or "Paradise Lost" are good choices. The first, I read but want to spend more time with it. The second, I haven't read but Milton's poetry influenced a number of writers who lived and wrote later.

I have Paradise Lost and have picked it up a time or two but could never get into it. Maybe if I read with the group I will understand it.

I'm kind of liking Middlemarch. Eliot does have some witty and subtle humor.

The only one here I haven't read is Milton (I tried, like someone said above) so I guess I'd vote for that one.
I was going to suggest (and perhaps we could put this in as a suggestion for the future) something French, perhaps Gargantua & Pentagruel or The Red & the Black.

Frances wrote: "I was going to suggest (and perhaps we could put this in as a suggestion for the future) something French, perhaps Gargantua & Pentagruel.."

Oooh, do you think goodreads would let us discuss something as naughty as B&P?? :)

I, for one, am not averse to reading naughtiness lol. I think I would rather read one of Frances' suggestions than Milton, as long as we don't have to read them in French.

Dianna wrote: "I, for one, am not averse to reading naughtiness lol. I think I would rather read one of Frances' suggestions than Milton, as long as we don't have to read them in French."

Well, Paradise Lost has its fair share of naughtiness, doesn't it? I mean, these folks aren't married (after all, there's no priest or rabbi or civil servant authorised to marry folks), but they, uh, begin the begat. Pretty risque, eh? :)))

Did I start something here? Not sure I mean to--especially on a holiday weekend!

Some good choices, I love Paradise Lost, but I have already read it and not that long ago, I would really like to read The Aeneid which haven't yet had the oppertunity to read but have been wanting to. But also I would be quite interested in reading The Republic.

Do French novels fit into the group's idea of the 'Western Canon'. If so, have any books by Zola been considered?

MadgeUK wrote: "Do French novels fit into the group's idea of the 'Western Canon'. If so, have any books by Zola been considered?"

Isn't Zola 19th century? He was involved with the whole Dreyfus thing, I believe, so that's definitely fairly recent.

Madge the movie The Life of Emile Zola is a wonderful movie. Have you seen it?

I'm going to put in a plug for the Aeneid, which I have not read. I like a good story, and I know that this is a great one, but I just have never gotten around to reading it.

Frances wrote: "MadgeUK wrote: "Do French novels fit into the group's idea of the 'Western Canon'. If so, have any books by Zola been considered?"

Isn't Zola 19th century? He was involved with the whole Dreyfus ..."

No I don't think I have Dianna - must order it. Thanks.

Yes he did write about the Dreyfus affair Frances but he also wrote between 1864-1901 and Queen Victoria's reign spanned 1819-1901.

MadgeUK wrote: "Do French novels fit into the group's idea of the 'Western Canon'. If so, have any books by Zola been considered?"

Certainly some French novels do. The general test for this group is whether the book has been part, either mainstream or peripheral, of the "great conversation" that Adler and Hutchins speak of. I frankly don't know Zola well enough to know.

I have noted before, and note again, that there are many, many reading groups on Goodreads, and books which don't fit into our niche of Classics and the Western Canon are likely to find plenty of opportunities for discussion in other groups. Not that I want to encourage anyone to leave this group to go elsewhere, but it's easy to participate both here and also elsewhere if that suits one's reading preferences.

While I'm just a moderator, not the book chooser -- that's up to the group -- until we have done a fairly good job on the "mainstream" classics I personally prefer to see us choosing works that are included on one or more of the traditional "great books" or "Western Canon" lists. But that's preference, not mandate.

What/where are these lists? There are many. A few of the more prominent are:

Great Books of the Western World series

Clifton Fadiman's Lifetime Reading Plan

The Harvard Classics (and, to a somewhat lesser extent, the Harvard Classics Shelf of Fiction)

Harold Bloom: The Western Canon (His inclusion of early Eastern texts such as Gilgamesh will be a bit controversial to some Western Canon traditionalists, but he explains his reasoning in the book.)

The St. John's College Reading List

the Columbia University Reading List, Literature Humanities

These are just a few of many attempts to define what should be included in the "Western Canon." There are many other such lists, but any work that appears in one or, preferably, more than one of the above lists certainly qualifies as a traditional part of the Canon.

I say again that we can still choose works which do not appear on any of these lists, but in that case I think we should have a fairly good argument for why they should be read here in preference to traditional Canonic literature.

That's a long answer to a short question, but I think it sometimes is helpful to re-clarify the general intent behind this group.

I'm just going to put my opinion out there for you all. I would prefer not to read poetry unless it's Walt Whitman's Leaves of Grass or something like that. I am not sure how to say this without sounding base and common but I just don't think I will be able to relate to something that is overly religious in nature, especially if it deals with church dogma.

The poll for voting for our next major read has been posted in the Polls section.

Please vote for the book you would most like to read and discuss here.

As usual in this group, please only submit a vote if you plan to read and discuss the book with the group if it selected. We encourage all group members to participate, but we understand that some members aren't always able to join discussions, so ask that only members interested in being active in the group for the next book if their selection is chosen vote for a selection. Thanks.

MadgeUK wrote: "Yes he did write about the Dreyfus affair Frances but he also wrote between 1864-1901 and Queen Victoria's reign spanned 1819-1901.."

Madge, I brought this up because we were a book written before 1700, not a Victorian-era book.

MadgeUK wrote: "Queen Victoria's reign spanned 1819-1901."

Just so people don't get confused, I think you had a typo there. Her life was 1819-1901. Her reign was 1837-1901.

I know you know better, just as I know better who wrote the Oresteia. Senior moments happen!

Thanks Everyman! :):)

Thanks Everyman! :):)

I also realise, to answer Frances, that I was confusing this group with the 'Victorians' one because my remark was meant to mean that Zola would fit into their timescale of being written during Victoria's reign. I have therefore recommended Zola to that group although I do think that at least Germinal; or Nana should be in the Western Canon.

Okay, we all are in too many bookgroups or at least in too many that overlap. We might need some kind of monastery type arrangement. Now that so many people don't read books, those of us who do could shut ourselves away with our books and our book groups and do the reading for everyone. Of course, my kids and husband and cats might not like it, but I think I could probably bring the cats with me:).

Andrea wrote: "Okay, we all are in too many bookgroups..."

I used to be. There was a time I tried to follow more than a dozen book discussions, mostly on Yahoo. It got absurd, and I was so busy trying to keep up with the readings that I had no time for just doing reading I wanted to do that wasn't connected with a group.

I don't know whether it's an official addiction according to DSM, but if it isn't, it should be!

It's April 13. So Milton is the winner, right?

Laurele wrote: "It's April 13. So Milton is the winner, right?"

Yep. That's our next read.

So the general reading plan will be:
Middlemarch through May 18th.
Interim read -- May 19-June 1
Paradise Lost - Starts June 2. There are 12 Books in PL. We could do one book a week, taking 12 weeks. We could do 2 books a week, taking 6 weeks. Or we could compromise and take 9 weeks, basically two months, breaking the books up conveniently over that time period (that would be roughly 5 days per book). I'm open to any suggestions.

I'll say up front that Paradise Lost seems daunting to the first time reader. It is, after all, a very long poem, something that modern readers are not at all used to. But we should perhaps remember that poetry is the original form of literature. All the early epics were written as poetry -- the Iliad, the Odyssey, the Aeneid, Beowulf, Gilgamesh, ballads, etc. It wasn't until a few centuries ago that stories started to be told mostly in prose instead of poetry. So really, going back to our roots, it's prose that should properly speaking be the intimidating form of storytelling, not poetry.

That said, Paradise Lost still seems daunting! But I think once people get into it it will make a lot of sense and be easier to read than people may fear.

That said too, is there anybody who wants to tackle moderating, or co-moderating, Paradise Lost? I would be happy to turn over or share moderating with anybody who would like to try their hand at it. Come, don't be shy!

Amanda wrote: "I would like to try, if I'm not too green :)"

You're not green at all. At least not in that sense -- I can't see whether you've been rolling down a warm, sunny grassy slope today, like I used to do, in which case you might indeed be green!

Amanda wrote: "ha- not last time I checked! I've just been in so many book clubs, and I was thinking about re-reading Milton anyway, so I thought it would be fun to help moderate a discussion."

Great!

I find that listening to Paradise Lost in an audio version adds a considerable richness and dimension to it. For me, since I read quickly, it slows down the poem and forces me to pay attention to passages which in reading it I might have glossed over. In addition, it makes the magnificence of the language even more impressive than it is when read.

For Paradise Lost, there are a number of unabridged recordings available. (I would definitely avoid abridged recordings; there are lots of those, too, but yuck.)

I have listened to two versions. My preferred, which I think is excellent, is an audio file available from Audible (it can be downloaded to almost any audio device, MP3 player, Kindle, ipod, etc.), and maybe elsewhere, read by Anton Lesser.

The other is an older version on cassette (maybe now on CD) read by Frederick Davidson. I find it acceptable but not as good as Lesser -- normally I like Davidson as a reader, but I don't think this is his best work, though it it's what you can get from your library it's certainly acceptable.

There are others which might be as good; maybe others have them and can recommend them. (If you look on Audible, be careful; there are several other audiobooks titled Paradise Lost that are NOT by Milton! In Audible, you can listen to excerpts of readings so you can see whether you like the reader's style. For example, I'm not usually a sexist, but I just can't appreciate PL read by a woman, and I don't enjoy a reading such as that by Charlton Griffin that has a musical background.)

If you can, I do recommend at least trying out an audio version to see whether it enhances your appreciation of the poem as much as it does mine.

Everyman wrote: "I find that listening to Paradise Lost in an audio version adds a considerable richness and dimension to it. For me, since I read quickly, it slows down the poem and forces me to pay attention to ..."

Lesser is definitely the best in my book. If you have never read Paradise Lost before, don't expect to be able to start out with audio only and get much out of it. Be sure to have a text copy, too--one with good footnotes.

Laurele wrote: "Lesser is definitely the best in my book. If you have never read Paradise Lost before, don't expect to be able to start out with audio only and get much out of it. Be sure to have a text copy, too--one with good footnotes.
"

I seldom disagree with Laurel, but I'm going to offer not a better but a different view here.

I agree that a copy with footnotes is important. Milton was a voracious reader, perhaps the most educated man of his generation, and he peppered PL with wonderful Biblical and Classical references that most of us miss because we just don't have the same reading background that he did. (Madge is probably closest, having been educated, I assume, in Britain before war when education was really education, but American schools just don't drill us in the classics.)


But I think that on the first read, one should read PL without being distracted by the footnotes, just reveling in the magnificent language and getting out of it what one can (which is a lot) but worrying more about letting the overarching concept wash over one, letting the details slide past temporarily. Then on a second read, which I believe is essential -- and there will be plenty of time in our schedule to read each book twice -- worry about the footnotes, picking up on the classical illusions, internal references, and all the other details that enrich the poem tremendously.

But I personally believe that the first read through should focus on the forest, not the trees.

Just my personal opinion, of course, and offered with great trepidation at differing with Laurel, for whose knowledge and teaching expertise I have the very greatest respect and appreciation.

Yes, I 'did' PL at school and my grand-daughter did it for her recent A-levels - we still do the old classics here. (My 12 year old grand-daughter has just embarked upon Chaucer....)

I think that first time readers should first try to appreciate PL as poetry and that the first read, even for a few pages, should be 'straight', as a poem, to get the rhythm of it. Perhaps listening to audio afterwards. The analysis can come later, via footnotes or whatever takes your fancy. (I will stay on the sidelines to inject some of the lesser known politics which Milton surrepticiously inserted into PL!!:).)

Here are a couple of audio 'tasters' read by Sir Anthony Quayle:-

http://www.amazon.com/Paradise-Lost-b...

MadgeUK wrote: Here are a couple of audio 'tasters' read by Sir Anthony Quayle:-

http://www.amazon.com/Paradise-Lost-by-J...


Madge, Anthony Quayle is my favorite Voice, bar none. I wish he had recorded the whole thing.

MadgeUK wrote: "(I will stay on the sidelines to inject some of the lesser known politics which Milton surrepticiously inserted into PL!!:).) "

Sidelines my foot. I'm counting on you to be right there in the middle of things with your great insights. Any chance that your grand-daughter might want to join us in the discussion, too?

LOL. My eldest grand-daughter is about to embark on her gap year travels to Cambodia, Thailand, Vietnam and India with War and Peace on her Ipod!! My skeptical 12 year old grand-daughter is too busy arguing the finer points of religion with her RE teacher at the mo, such as 'What is the Problem of Evil?' - I hate to think what ammunition she might find if I introduce her to PL!

MadgeUK wrote: "My skeptical 12 year old grand-daughter is too busy arguing the finer points of religion with her RE teacher, such as 'What is the Problem of Evil?', at the mo - I hate to think what ammunition she might find if I introduce her to PL! "

LOL! But I expect that this will be very much an issue in our PL discussion.

Ah yes, the Free Will Defense: 'I formed them free and free they must remain.....' She is tackling that too!

(BTW The Problem of Evil and the FWD are themes in The Picture of Dorian Gray too, which is the next Victorian read I believe.)

The New York Times today had an article on free college courses on line, and I happened to run across this one on Milton. Very timely! Haven't listened to more than a few minutes of it yet, but it's been well graded by listeners, and the price is certainly right.
http://academicearth.org/courses/milton

Nice, thanks for the free courses link. I could do worse than watching a lecture on Lycidas.

I'm glad Madge reminded me of the Anthony Quayle recordings of Paradise Lost. I dug out my old audio cassettes of him reading all of the first four books last night and listened to them all. I just wish he had recorded the whole thing.

On another note, I will probably not be around much this week. My mother is in the hospital with a couple of broken bones near her pelvis, and I'll be busy helping my father know what is going on (he's 93 and does not remember much of anything) and getting him into the hospital and back each day.

Sorry to hear about your mother Laurel. I hope all goes well.

Very sorry to hear about your mother, Laurel. For her sake, I'm glad you're there to help out, but I know it's going to be a huge burden and strain in you.

Remember that your first priority is to keep yourself well.

We'll be glad to see you here whenever you can spare the time, but we certainly understand that family comes first.

Thanks, all. I'm home from a long day at the hospital. I feel like I'm raising a couple of two year olds. Neither my mother nor my father can understand what is going on, so I have to give the same answers to the same questions all day long. Things will work out though, I'm sure.