Posted on 02/03/2014 2:13:32 PM PST by jocon307
Rand sure did want to make sure people got the point so every character gets a bit preachy. General rule of thumb is if a character has a speech that goes on longer than a page, skip the next 10. You won’t miss any plot.
I’ve read #3 and #10.
After reading, “That Every Man Be Armed,” by Stephen P Halbrook and loving some of the awesome quotes about armed citizenry in that, I’ll be reading me some Machiavelli and Cesare Beccaria next.
“False is the idea of utility that sacrifices a thousand real advantages for one imaginary or trifling inconvenience; that would take fire from men because it burns, and water because one may drown in it; that it has no remedy for evils, except destruction. The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are of such a nature. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.”
—Cesare Beccaria
Try the audiobook. I love listening to them while at work.
I don't know about Machiavelli. If everything else he wrote contradicts The Prince then so much the worse for everything else he wrote. If he intended to make the opposite point of all he wrote in the book, then obviously, he failed.
I guess I should list the books (they are listed 10-1, don’t know if that’s a meaningful ranking or not):
10. “Atlas Shrugged” by Ayn Rand
9. “On the Origin of Species” by Charles Darwin
8. “Les Miserables” by Victor Hugo and
“A Tale of Two Cities” by Charles Dickens
7. “1984” by George Orwell
6. “Democracy in America” by Alexis De Tocqueville
5. “The Wealth of Nations” by Adam Smith
4. “Moby Dick” by Herman Melville
3. “The Art of War” by Sun Tzu
2. “The Prince” by Niccolo Machiavelli
1. “Ulysses” by James Joyce
I’ve read the list. I’ve also read War and Peace, in Russian, all 3 pounds of it. I’ve read The Rise and Fall of The Roman Empire. Browning’s poems; Service’s poems (more to my dark taste than that of Frost, whom I’ve also read); Carl Sandburg’s works; Mark Twain’s works; Shakespeare, Chaucer, Dickens, and Orwell; Huxley; Aristotle, Socrates and Pythagorus; writs of Stoicism, Epicureanism, and the follies of Bacchus; Roman philosophers and Euclid; a few writings of Madame Blovetsky, Crowley, Gardner and Buckland, mixed with Mather and Whitefield; Hammett, Spillane, Chandler, and Poe. To ensure that my American Spirit stays true to Freedom, I have read ‘Das Kapital’ and ‘Mein Kampf’, and paid attention to the speeches given by a certain Premier Kruschchev, when he endangered me and my fellow Americans.
I first read 1984 in high school and did not really understand it then. I've read it again a few times since then. Each time I read it I am more impressed.
A Tale of Two Cities requires a knowledge of the French Revolution and the Reign of Terror to understand. It is an interesting period in history. Les Miserables is not about the French Revolution but rather a later time in France.
The Prince is interesting if you understand that period in the history of Florence and Italy. It is dedicated to Lorenzo de Medici and was Machiavelli's unsuccessful attempt to gain the patronage of the Medicis.
I doubt anyone except a very rare few have actually read Origin of the Species or Ulysses. The Wealth of Nations is an important work because of a few of the principles that are learned in economics. I don't think you need to read the entire book.
I’m totally maxed out on Les Miserables. I read it two or three times in the unabridged but I have an amazing ability to skip over passages in books that I find boring so I listened to it on audiobooks when it finally came out. I had to listen to every word of Hugo’s socialist BS and it so bogged down the story that I was fed up with it by the time I finished. The sewer parts are awesome though and I totally love the Archbishop. Watch the latest movie. The archbishop is played by the man who created the role of Jean ValJean in the original stage play.
Lots more people would take literature courses if they consisted of reading aloud in a bar. :-))
I had a pocket book edition. Started it around 3-4 times. That was about it.
Read John Granger’s Harry Potter’s Bookshelf. In it he makes the argument very well that A Tale of Two Cities is a book about alchemy. So is Hugo’s The Hunchback of Notre Dame which I actually prefer to Les Miserables. Watch for gold, red, and white in any of these books. Also twins and dopplegangers.
Actually this was a literature course.
I have The Prince sitting in a drawer. Perhaps I need a different translation.
“A big ol’ tip of the hat for finishing Gravity’s Rainbow.”
Thank you, thank you very much (elvis voice).
I barely understood it myself, but I did find the scene where our hero (I guess) visits the gal in war time London and eats awful English candies very amusing.
> Ulysses is the only one I didn’t read. Just can’t get past the first 50 pages.
You did better than me. My brain fried at page 20.
I loathe and despise Watership Down. I was sooo pissed off that I didn’t get a happy ending with the rabbits, that it’s been more than 30 years, and I still complain about not getting the ending I wanted.
“Johnathan Livingston Seagull”
Oh yes. In hindsight, that book and the pet rock were probably the flashing neon signs that our society was in deep, deep trouble!
Sweet.
1984 and Ulysses here.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.