Replies

Times do change. As far as entertainment and literature goes, being out of the loop with books written 150 years ago isn't that big a deal. A lot of the classics are actually quite dry, by todays standards. I've never been able to drink enough coffee to keep me awake through Hemmingway, and I'd rather jump into North Korea armed only with an accordian than read another page of Faulkner. Have you ever tried to read Lewis Carrol's 'Alice in Wonderland'? Keep some Absolut handy, it's as confusing to read sober as 'Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas'.

Are the youth of today missing out by not reading James Joyce?

I personally read everything from Army field manuals, ancient Chinese poetry, biographies, 1940's sci fi, Maxim magazine, and any historical or current affairs book I find lying around unattended. Let's be honest, though, Maxim is current American culture, and the other stuff is job or personal interest. As a whole, Americans know what they like, which is humor, supermodels, and making fun of France.

Same thing goes for art. Call me a barbarian, but I don't think that the Mona Lisa is all that hot. Most pieces hanging in galleries are a lot less impressive looking to me than an action movie with well done CGI. I'd imagine that most people feel the same way. I enjoy going to see what our ancestors made it gives insight into how they lived, which I find fascinating. It's just that a statue with no arms doesn't speak to me culturally.

A story about a prince who has a crush on his mother, and pretends to be insane to catch usurpers, (because something is rotten in Denmark) may be historically interesting, but it doesn't speak to America, 2003.

Seeing an average guy bitten by a radioactive spider and transformed into something more powerful, but even more vulnerable, and trying to use his power responsibly, now that speaks to me culturally. Think about it.

We do have a culture, but it's not shrinking by any means. We will slowly lose contact with the past, as we move further away from it, but that's a natural progression. The wisdom and knowledge of the classics runs through our culture now, available to those who want it. If our culture fails, then both modern and classic tales will remain on record for future generations.

Our values may be a bit out of order, but our culture doth bestride this narrow world like a colossus, while petty French and Islamic fundamentalists scurry under our huge media corporations to find themselves dishonorable graves.

There is nothing wrong with enjoying modern culture. However, a knowledge of the classics is necessary for understanding much of modern culture, in much the same way that an understanding of the Bible is necessary in order to appreciate Moby Dick.

Look at the confusion that the Ramirez cartoon in the Los Angeles Times caused, because many people didn't know the photo he was using as an allusion, and that photo was taken during the Viet Nam war, a scant 40 years ago.

Each generation thinks that what went before is outdated and old-fashioned, and that his own times are superior. That is the nature of humanity.

It is not necessary that you appreciate the Venus de Milo or the Mona Lisa. It IS necessary that you recognize them for what they are, rather than grouping them with garden gnomes and Dogs Playing Poker.

Nobody ever read Shakespeare for the plots, you goofball. IT'S THE POETRY.

And "historically interesting"? No, it isn't.

IT'S THE POETRY.

Dear God in heaven restrain me.