Posted on 07/27/2004 12:17:17 PM PDT by Borges
In the intro he claims that since Mein Kampf was ignored upon publication and wasn't really read by anyone until Hitler came to power it didn't really hold much influence. If it WAS read in the 1920s and Hitler's rise to power had been averted then it would be influential.
Two great calls by you. Well done.
I think his dating of the Old Testament is a little off.
I would definitely place it post the Iliad and Odessy.
Based on the Qumran Texts, there were many versions of the Old Testament Books around as recently as a few years before the Birth of Christ.
Some of the individual books may be older, but the collection called the Old Testament is not.
Really?
I thought Gurdjieff was sui generis, and Ouspensky a new-agey drone.
De gustibus non est disputandum.
The Influence will be apparent. It is as, or more, significant than the inclusion of Orwell. I would further suggest, judging by the contemporary inclusions to his list, that it is the content Seymor does not agree with rather than his tired, tawdry, attempts to dismiss the work via its prose.
I think Mein Kampf was influential because writting it expressed Hitler's thoughts and the thoughts expressed in it influenced the world.
Also, I would place the Avesta much earlier than 500 B.C. - perhaps 1000 B.C. or even earlier, according to linguistics experts who studied the language it was written in.
Ouspensky spoke better English.
I didn't see "Lime Rock Park -- 35 Years of Racing" by Rich Taylor on the list. Was there a typo?
Lever Action. L. Neil Smith.
Hitler would have still come to power even if he never wrote MK. That's the issue. The book itself didn't influence people in a meaningful way until after the fact.
Gurdjieff had wonderful stories!
He may have been a fabulist, but a compelling one.
Freud is on there.
As to Huxley, he talked about Zamyatin's 'We' from 1921 as an obvious source for both Orwell and Huxkley and a superior work of art to 1984 or BNW but since it is so little known or translated he chose the novel with the widest reach.
Didn't it influence his followers? Or didn't even they bother to read it?
I read it. Its an interesting excursion into the mind of a total lunatic.
In the intro he says that Hegel's work is a much more influential expression of what Hitler represented. He regards Hegel and John Calvin as two of the most hateful people who ever lived acutally. And was quite sympathetic to Marx who he claimed was not to be blamed for the atrocities committed in his name.
I've read 3 or 4 of em. LOL. No Epictetus? too bad.
Shame on the list maker ...
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.