Recommend a Classic

[boooeee]

So, I have some free time coming up because I'm switching jobs (yay) and I was wanting to find a good book to relax with. I've decided that I want to read a "classic" of lierature, and was hoping to get recommendations from the forum.

My arbitrary requirement is that it needs to have been written prior to 1900.

I read the Count of Monte Cristo last year (all 1400 pages). Definitely one of my favorite books (especially the first third or so at the Chateau D'If; the last third could have been tightened up a bit).

So, which of the "classics" actually deserves its reputation?

[Kullervo]

Huckleberry Finn.

Heart of Darkness makes your cut too. (1899)

[Skeptic]

In my experience, most--not all--classics really DO deserve their reputation. If you want a classic that's funny, you can't go wrong with "The Pickwick Papers" or "Three Men in a Boat" (possibly the funniest book ever written).

[boooeee]

In my experience, most--not all--classics really DO deserve their reputation. If you want a classic that's funny, you can't go wrong with "The Pickwick Papers" or "Three Men in a Boat" (possibly the funniest book ever written).Skeptic - You have me intrigued. I had never heard of "Three Men in a Boat", nor its author, Jerome K. Jerome.

Kullervo - I had considered Twain. I've read many of his essays (Letters From the Earth is great), but never a full novel. We were assigned Huck Finn in high school, but I don't think I finished it.

[Jon.]

Most anything by Shakespeare - read it first, then find a good film adaptation to see what they do with the text.

Personal favourites are King Lear, Titus Andronicus (the film from about five years ago was fantastic!), Twelfth Night, and Henry V.

[Hotspur]

Anything by Jules Verne---but especially some of his lesser known works such as The Mysterious Island or Michael Strogoff.

You also might want to reconsider your 1900 cutoff---over the past few years I have been reading or rereading some of the novels on the Modern Library's top 100 novels of the 20th century. Some are outstanding (also some are terrible, but each to his own). Link: http://www.randomhouse.com/modernlibrary/100bestnovels.html

[Jorghnassen]

War and Peace, the classic as per definition...

[Kullervo]

"Three Men in a Boat" (possibly the funniest book ever written).Funny that the only people I know who have read it are Russians.

Are you Russian, Bent?

[tkingdoll]

The Count of Monte Cristo is my favourite novel :)

For starters, I recommend The Moon and Sixpence, Lord of the Flies, The Old Man and the Sea, The Once and Future King (in fact, that's a must-read), and Tono Bungay.

Oh, and I second Pickwick Papers.

[drkitten]

Dante's Divine Comedy. The Dorothy Sayers translation, if you can get it.

[Jon.]

Also, Beowulf, the Seamus Heaney translation. Does that count? It was written well before 1900 but translated well after.:D

[brooklyn44]

"Pride and Prejudice"; "Bleak House"; "Vanity Fair"; "The Brothers Karamazov"; "Don Quixote"; "Huckleberry Finn"; "Moby-Dick"; "Middlemarch."
With the exception of Cervantes, they all are 19th Century. (not by design)

[LibraryLady]

Wuthering Heights

Anything by Jane Austen, especially Emma

Alice in Wonderland (bet you didn't see that coming ;) )

[StewartP]

3 men in a boat had me laughing out loud. It has a Jeeves and Wooster feel. I additionaly liked it because I used live near the Thames in Berkshire so I knew a lot of the places mentioned. The Bells of Ousley is no longer a pub but a Harvester restaurant.
It has a sequel 3 men on the Bummel.

I liked Moby Dick by Herman Melville. A fascinating insight on an industry and way of life now disappeared. It starts with one of the best opening sentences ever: "Call me Ishmael".

[Stir]

I'd nominate "Da Vinci Code"

... 'cept it wasn't before 1900

... and it's not all that good

[StewartP]

I watched the film on DVD 2 nights ago. Worse than the book. Which is saying something.

[TragicMonkey]

For a classic that was considered a classic eighty years ago, but is all but forgotten today, try Hudson's Green Mansions. Very dreamy feel to it. Sheridan LeFanu is pretty entertaining, if you like horror stories. Poe is worth reading beyond the three stories and two poems you get in high school--how many people remember the funny ones?

And if you'll relax the 1900 rule, there are some truly excellent authors who are currently somewhat neglected, like Jan de Hartog. MR James remains the greatest ghost story writer ever. GK Chesterton's Father Brown stories for the best mysteries. And the writer who wins my Monkey Seal of Approval for being the greatest American writer to date is Pearl Buck. Yes, that Pearl Buck. Only not that horrible The Good Earth. Even the Nobel committee made it clear that the prize was in spite of that book. Her best works are Mandala and Pavilion of Women.

eta: I forgot Lord Dunsany! Read him! If you can find him. It's not easy.

[tkingdoll]

wait, there's a 1900 rule???

I didn't take any notice of that.

*re-reads the OP*

Oh, yeah. Well, some of my recommendations still qualify :P

[Curnir]

the Iliad
the Odessey
On War (Clausewitz)
The Prince
The three musketeers.

[Luciana]

Think outside the box!

The Posthumous Memoirs of Br'as Cubas (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0195101707/sr=8-1/qid=1155335205/ref=pd_bbs_1/103-8032936-7111017?ie=UTF8) fulfills all your criteria with flying colors. It's funny and brilliantly written. And there's the added bonus that it is a classic that few of your friends, if any, have read. :D

[Van]

I would say any Austen, for the language and the wonderfully constructed characters. I just started going back over my children's classics and I'm thoroughly enjoying them, Charlotte's Web, Wind in the Willows, Anne of Green Gables... Nostalgia and great literature. And don't go for The Iliad. Or if you do do it in comic form. My A level text is filled with trailing pencil marks where I feel asleep while notating.

[Lord Muck oGentry]

And don't go for The Iliad. Or if you do do it in comic form.

Fair enough.The Odyssey is yer man. In the original, of course.

http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/w/winstonchu164037.html

[Van]

A bit better, but quite frankly Odysseus deserves a good talking to. Somke of the plays are quite good though, I love The Birds and The Medea.

[fuelair]

Funny that the only people I know who have read it are Russians.

Are you Russian, Bent?

I am not Russian and I have read it. There is evidence (but I am remembering this from 20 years ago) that Robert A Heinlein read and (as did I) enjoyed it. He wasn't Russian. Of course, you don't know me and, in fairness, I assume you did not know Heinlein, and I did not know Heinlein but , apropos of nothing, I have wonderful - and exclusive footage of him not enjoying a bellydancing performance at a WorldCon. The book is great - and not at all long!!!

Supporting Three Men in a Boat!! (Edited to add)

[Angus McPresley]

Personally, I thought "The Count of Monte Cristo" had some very cool moments, but man did it drag on after the first half. Revenge is a dish best served bored, I guess. :)

I would recommend

Albert Camus, "The Stranger"
John Steinbeck, "The Winter of Our Discontent"
Graham Greene, "The Quiet American"

[Polaris]

Candide.

[Dr Adequate]

Could I put in a word for Rudyard Kipling's Plain Tales From The Hills, Edith Wharton's, The Age of Innocence, and Oscar Wilde's The Picture of Dorian Gray?

Jane Austen, yes, but not Emma. Try Pride and Prejudice.

If I could sneak a twentieth-century book onto the list, the most neglected classic novel I know is C P Snow's The Masters. I have a theory that it's neglected because none of his other books are any good; but with The Masters he just gets it right.

[Hawk one]

Let's not forget "Les Miserables", eh? Or "The Miserables" if you like, though the original title's got a certain tone to it...

[StewartP]

Fair enough.The Odyssey is yer man. In the original, of course.
Do not, DO NOT, attempt Ullyses by James Joyce. What a seriously over-hyped book. I bought it and have tried to read it 3 or 4 times, I can't get past the first 50 pages. I've really tried, but, ow, it's illegible.
I love the premise - a day, in real time, in Dublin, mirroring The Odyssey. But I just can't get involved with the characters.
On Odyssy mirrors, the film Brother, Where Art Thou was excellent.

[TragicMonkey]

Do not, DO NOT, attempt Ullyses by James Joyce. What a seriously over-hyped book. I bought it and have tried to read it 3 or 4 times, I can't get past the first 50 pages.

It is a brilliant book, if you can get past the writing.

Or so I heard. I couldn't make it past page ten. The man writes like a headache feels.

I forgot to recommend Madame Bovary. In her forty-five years of teaching, my English teacher never had a single student who actually liked Madame Bovary until me. She didn't even mind that I liked it because I found it deeply, deeply funny. And I got an A++ for my dramatic reenactment of the entire book in ten minutes with construction paper puppets shaped like bears.

[Meri]

I just read Dracula for the first time, and enjoyed it. There's a lot of religion in it, of course, but it's nice and creepy.

[LibraryLady]

Frankenstein by Mary Shelley is radically different from what you would expect, if you've seen any of the movies. I liked it.

I second the Madame Bovary suggestion, but I didn't find it funny. It's another monster story.....

If you're not suicidal, the novels of Thomas Hardy are great. Tess of the D'Urbervilles might be a good one to start with. However, if you are suicidal in the least, steer clear.

It's twentieth century, but Josephine Tey's Daughter of Time is a wonderful book for people who like critical thinking.

For sheer soap opera, you might try All This and Heaven Too, also twentieth century, but set in the mid-nineteenth century and based on a (yes, you guessed it) true story.

And, if you want to do Dickens, you might want to read my very favorite Dickens, Our Mutual Friend.

[TragicMonkey]

And, if you want to do Dickens, you might want to read my very favorite Dickens, Our Mutual Friend.

I liked Hard Times, although I will confess to disappointment that it wasn't quite the same as a movie with the same title that I quite enjoyed.

[TriangleMan]

Frankenstein by Mary Shelley is radically different from what you would expect, if you've seen any of the movies. I liked it.
You beat me to it, when I read the OP Frankenstein was the first book I thought of. I liked it more than Dracula.

For pre-1900 books try some Japanese literature. The Tale of Genji, Tales of the Heike or The Confessions of Lady Nijo were all great books (the last one is a diary though, not fiction).

[Foolmewunz]

Another vote for Three Men in a Boat. And if you want to have real fun, pick up, "To Say Nothing of the Dog" by Connie Willis. This was from when she still wrote Speculative Fiction (Ellison's term, I think, for good Sci Fi)... She went all Woo on me with Passages..... But for any fan of Three Men in a Boat, it's a great book (even if you're not a fan of SF).

Pre 1900 - try Knut Hamsun's Hunger. Another one of those obscure classics; sold about ten times better in Europe than here, as did most of his stuff. (And no, he wasn't a nazi... Hitler gave him an audience when he was 80 and nearly senile, and one version has it that Hamsun gave him s**t for the way Norwegians were being treated... yet another (Henry Miller, I believe) felt that he was always just a limelight hound and ANYONE who gave him an audience was acceptable.)

[Van]

Jane Austen, yes, but not Emma. Try Pride and Prejudice.

.

What? Emma is fascinating. Emma herself is obnoxious, I didn't find her lovable at all, but that is part of the beauty of it. It is a gorgeous portrayal of a young woman full of her own importance and unable to see the importance of others. Emma is a more interesting character that Elizabeth Bennett.

[TragicMonkey]

Oh, and there's the Chinese classic "Dream of the Red Chamber". It's pretty good, especially if you get a translation that doesn't cut out the naughty bits. It's also pretty funny, especially all the emphasis on young ladies who are of such refined nobility that they become deathly ill at the slightest provocation. "Pao Yu, distracted by the chatter of his cousins, neglected to refill Black Jade's teacup. Stricken to the core by this evidence of gross carelessness for her, Black Jade fell into a deep swoon. Like a pale lotus blossom on the bosom of the snow, she remained near death for three months."

[boooeee]

Okay, I think I may have to take more than a week off between jobs.

Thanks to everybody for the suggestions so far. My short list at this point is:

Three Men in a Boat
War and Peace
Hard Times
Les Miserables
The Posthumous Memoirs of Br'as Cubas

[Soapy Sam]

"On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection "
C.R.Darwin.

[TragicMonkey]

"On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection "
C.R.Darwin.

Unfortunately, thanks to all the hype about it, the ending is no surprise. The murderer turns out to be Evolution, and the motive was godlessness and secular humanism. Evolution then went over the falls, locked in a death struggle with Religion.

[boooeee]

Unfortunately, thanks to all the hype about it, the ending is no surprise. The murderer turns out to be Evolution, and the motive was godlessness and secular humanism. Evolution then went over the falls, locked in a death struggle with Religion.Besides, I've seen the movie version already.

[Wudang]

Unfortunately, thanks to all the hype about it, the ending is no surprise. The murderer turns out to be Evolution, and the motive was godlessness and secular humanism. Evolution then went over the falls, locked in a death struggle with Religion.

It's still better than the older book "The Bible". Some people swear by it but I found it horribly confused, the central character, God, who seems to be the single thread that much of the "narrative" (such as it is) is linked by comes across like a right-wing gym teacher on bad acid. The morality of the stories is reprehensible where it is not confused or downright contradictory. The second half introduces a "son" character, possibly as an attempt to start the narrarive afresh but frankly he just confuses things even more. The "Gospels" chapters tries to do a Rashomon-style trick of telling the same story from different characters viewpoints but it's handled badly and, again, just comes across as confused.
And if you think trekkies take their crap too seriously you should go to a Bible group sometime. Sheesh.

[TragicMonkey]

It's still better than the older book "The Bible". Some people swear by it but I found it horribly confused, the central character, God, who seems to be the single thread that much of the "narrative" (such as it is) is linked by comes across like a right-wing gym teacher on bad acid. The morality of the stories is reprehensible where it is not confused or downright contradictory. The second half introduces a "son" character, possibly as an attempt to start the narrarive afresh but frankly he just confuses things even more. The "Gospels" chapters tries to do a Rashomon-style trick of telling the same story from different characters viewpoints but it's handled badly and, again, just comes across as confused.
And if you think trekkies take their crap too seriously you should go to a Bible group sometime. Sheesh.

I liked the Bible. I was really surprised when God turned out to be Jesus's father.

"Jesus, I am your father!"
"No! That's not true! That's impossible!"
"Search your feelings. You know it to be true."
"Noooooo!"

[Soapy Sam]

I liked the Bible. I was really surprised when God turned out to be Jesus's father.

"Jesus, I am your father!"
"No! That's not true! That's impossible!"
"Search your feelings. You know it to be true."
"Noooooo!"

And Mary- the First Jewish Mother. She had her own series later, I believe.

[rats]

Jonathon Swift: Gulliver’s Travels and A Tale of a Tub.

[Kullervo]

Burton's translation of 1001 Nights is worth a shot. Something like 13 volumes and lots of feelthy parts.

[Van]

[QUOTE=TragicMonkey;1842655]I liked the Bible. I was really surprised when God turned out to be Jesus's father.

I gave up reading anything but the Bible for lent and I am still on the 1st testament. I haven't got to that bit yet. I guess now I don't have to. It's good though. Hard work, but enlightening. I could do with a revision guide though. My pastor jumps around a bit and confuses me with Hebrew.

[TragicMonkey]

[QUOTE=TragicMonkey;1842655]I liked the Bible. I was really surprised when God turned out to be Jesus's father.

I gave up reading anything but the Bible for lent and I am still on the 1st testament. I haven't got to that bit yet. I guess now I don't have to. It's good though. Hard work, but enlightening. I could do with a revision guide though. My pastor jumps around a bit and confuses me with Hebrew.

In 1206 the pope issued a bull to the effect that it is perfectly reasonable to skip the "begats" section, on the grounds that nobody could be expected to make it all the way through, even on pain of hellfire.

[Van]

Thanks, useful to know that now. Do i also need to memorise all of the measurements of the temple etc.? Have you read the 100 minute Bible? Is it good? Does it end the same?

[TragicMonkey]

Thanks, useful to know that now. Do i also need to memorise all of the measurements of the temple etc.? Have you read the 100 minute Bible? Is it good? Does it end the same?

I abandoned reading the Bible in favor of instructive religious works like Monkey Apocalypse Beach Party.

As for the temple measurements, I'm reminded of a PG Wodehouse anecdote. Apparently it is possible, in some editions of the Bible, to glue two pages together so that when reading about Noah you'd turn the page from "and he took unto himself a wife" straight into "which was fifty cubits wide by a hundred cubits long by fifty cubits high" or something.

[Van]

I am going to a Church Conference next week. Any suggestions on how I could really cause a riot? Not that I am planning to, but it's always fun to have a plan in reserve!

[TragicMonkey]

I am going to a Church Conference next week. Any suggestions on how I could really cause a riot? Not that I am planning to, but it's always fun to have a plan in reserve!

Easy. Say something completely ordinary and noncontroversial and mainstream about God...but casually slip in the pronoun "she".

[hgc]

I am going to a Church Conference next week. Any suggestions on how I could really cause a riot? Not that I am planning to, but it's always fun to have a plan in reserve!Ask if atheists get half price at the collection plate.

[Wudang]

I am going to a Church Conference next week. Any suggestions on how I could really cause a riot? Not that I am planning to, but it's always fun to have a plan in reserve!

Set up a stall selling baskets of stones to punish the sinful with?

[Skeptic]

Unfortunately, thanks to all the hype about it, the ending is no surprise. The murderer turns out to be Evolution, and the motive was godlessness and secular humanism. Evolution then went over the falls, locked in a death struggle with Religion.

How do you nominate for the "language award" again?

[Loss Leader]

I have to say that my all-time favorite book is Of Human Bondage but it was written in 1915 so that's out.

Okay, my second favorite is Pride and Prejudice. Too girly, you say? Well, why don't you come here and say it to my face? Seriously, I could use the company.

[Brown]

A good post-1900 book, one that is available in the "Literature" section of most bookstores, is "Black Boy" by Richard Wright. When you read Wright's work, it's like entering a time machine, and the experience is not all that pleasant.

Pre-1900, I recommend Shakespeare, particularly "King Lear." The best way to read Shakespeare is aloud, giving each character a distinctive voice.

Also good is "The Odyssey," but I understand that there are good translations and poor ones. A bad translation can ruin the story for the reader.

Another good story--but the enjoyment of this one is also dependent upon whether the translation is good or bad--is "Cyrano be Bergerac" by Rostand.

For science fiction, consider "War of the Worlds" by HG Wells. For chills, consider the collected short stories of Edgar Allan Poe.

For sheer laughs, I recommend the second-funniest book ever written: "The Innocents Abroad" by Mark Twain.

I don't recommend (or perhaps more accurately, don't "get") anything by Jane Austen or Charles Dickens.

[merentha]

Ivanhoe

The Prisoner of Zenda

[grunion]

Wow, broad question. I might delve into the Russians or Dickens but for vacation reading I am partial to American fiction. Off the cuff suggestions:

Pre 1900: any good Poe collection
Turn of the Century: Any collection of short stories by O. Henry
20th Century: The Grapes Of Wrath

ETA: Oh yeah - Melville! If you haven't read Moby Dick you are really depriving yourself of something.

[TragicMonkey]

O'Henry's good. Ring Lardner is, too. And Dorothy Parker.

[Upchurch]

I'm just recently started re-reading Asimov's Foundation series. Damn good series.

[Loss Leader]

Oh yeah - Melville! If you haven't read Moby Dick you are really depriving yourself of something.

Good lord, I couldn't stand that book. As a contemporary critic [is reputed to have] said, "I learned more about whaling than I ever wanted to know."

Just read Father Mapple's sermon and throw the rest of the book away.

[Soapy Sam]

Any of Kipling's short stories.
And H.G.Wells of course.

Though some of the best are early 20th century.

[Alliebubs]

I forgot to recommend Madame Bovary. In her forty-five years of teaching, my English teacher never had a single student who actually liked Madame Bovary until me. She didn't even mind that I liked it because I found it deeply, deeply funny. And I got an A++ for my dramatic reenactment of the entire book in ten minutes with construction paper puppets shaped like bears.

I think I love you. :)

Someone mentioned Candide. That's a good one, at least what I remember of it.

I am ashamed to admit that I've read several novels written by American authors -- all pre-1900s -- and I can't recall one that I liked. Sigh.

[Alliebubs]

Pre 1900: any good Poe collection


Yes! Poe is simply a master. :)

[JamesDillon]

I am ashamed to admit that I've read several novels written by American authors -- all pre-1900s -- and I can't recall one that I liked. Sigh.

Oh, great, more America bashing. Bloody Canadians. Why do you hate freedom?

[Alliebubs]

Oh, great, more America bashing. Bloody Canadians. Why do you hate freedom?

My comment was actually more about me having a crappy memory, than America bashing. Methinks the American doth protest too much.

(By the way, your fondness for the word "bloody" is a bit skewed, since it happens to be a British slang word. The Brits, as you know, colonised Canada many years ago and kicked your American asses all the way back to your White House. Yep. It happened.)

To keep on topic, any books you care to recommend? :)

[Kopji]

There is a short novel by Twain called 'Puddinhead Wilson' that I enjoyed as a kid.

My favorite classic is probably the Hunchback of Notre Dame.

[a_unique_person]

In the non-fiction vein.

Julius Caesar - The Conquest of Gaul. Apparently he might have twisted the truth a bit to make him seem more impressive, still a good read.
Seutonius -The Twelve Caesars.

[Avita]

Hmm. I don't read that many classics, to be honest, and most of the ones I have read have already been recommended. I'd add Henry James, though, especially "The Pupil."

I absolutely have to second the recommendations for "Cyrano de Bergerac" (I hear that in English, the Brian Hooker translation is considered particularly good, though I haven't gotten my hands on it yet to verify). Also second Jane Austen ("Pride and Prejudice" and "Persuasion" in particular) and Mark Twain (especially his short stories from his later years.)

I have to take issue with FOOLMEWUNZ, though, for saying that Connie Willis' "Passages" is a woo book. I thought that it was one of the few books I have ever seen in which the heroine actually applies critical thinking to her own thought processes. So the ending is somewhat "feelgood" and ambiguous - I don't think that it invalidates the fact that throughout the book, the reader is urged to consider whether his/her own thinking is of the comforting or critical variety, or that it teaches how to test for evidence. And most of all, it talks about dealing with the discomfort of being uncertain, and of possibly never knowing for certain. Since I believe that fear of those two things drive far too many people into belief, I have to recommend "Passages" wholeheartedly.

[geoman]

I second any Austen, Emma over P&P precisely because, as Van notes, Emma herself is such an obnoxious bitch.

I wholeheartedly vote against 3 Men in a Boat, as I believe it to be one of the least funny novels ever.

And how about some Wilkie Collins? Specifically The Woman in White, as all his other ones I have read have plot holes the size of elephants.

[a_unique_person]

The best bit is that, AFAIK, they are all free.

[Orb]

Looking for something a little naughtier? :blush:

Fanny Hill: Memoirs of a Woman of Pleasure by:John Cleland

Not a single dirty word used, but very erotic and funny.

[Roboramma]

I'd like to cast my vote for the following as well:
The Odyssey
Kipling's stories, particularly, of course, The Jungle Books
The Thousand and One Nights, but make sure you get a complete translation. Particularly one that doesn't take out the breaks between nights.
The Origin of Species which is surprisingly readable, can make you laugh out loud with delight, and had me stunned at the insight it showed.

Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds in particular the chapters on the Crusades (I particularly enjoyed the bits where the idiot crusaders got themselves killed) and on witch-hunts. But there's a lot more - from alchemy to haunted houses, and all written with style and wonderful wit. Quite an interesting book that shows that credulity is certainly not a new thing, nor are it's negative repercussions.

Oh, and I don't know if they qualify, but the short stories of Summerset Maugham are pretty awesome.

[Skeptic]

I wholeheartedly vote against 3 Men in a Boat, as I believe it to be one of the least funny novels ever.

HERETIC!

Burn him! BUUUUUUUUURN HIM!!!

[antihippy]

I've not read through this entire thread so apologies if I replicate something someone else has recommended:

Which classics to recommend? Depends on the subject.

The Decline and Fall ... By Gibbons
The Peloponnesian War - Thucydides (some things never change)
The Art of War - Sun Tzu
I am not sure if he counts as classic but I've always like HP Lovecraft as well.
Anything by Verne, Doyle or Wells.

How on earth do you narrow it down? "So little life; so much to read..."

[Chaos]

I am almost done re-reading "Ivanhoe" by Sir Walter Scott.

I´m not sure I can recommend it, as it is a bit long-winded, and the characters use dreadfully antiquated language, even in situation where they probably wouldn´t. I mean, a guy confined to bed by his wounds who is locked in his room in a burning building probably wouldn´t talk like he´s on stage in a Shakespeare play, right?

The book is, of course, written for early 19th-century readers, and apparently especially for those who don´t know anything about the time period in question (late 12th century), as it explains a lot of things.

[Darth Rotor]

The Peloponnesian War - Thucydides (some things never change)
The Art of War - Sun Tzu

Make sure you read the Griffith's translation of Sun Tzu, annotated.

Also:

Treasure Island and Kidnapped by RL Stevenson (Pre 1900)

Post 1900

Starship Troopers by Robert Heinlein

Ender's Game by Orson Scott Card

DR

[kc440_]

Do not, DO NOT, attempt Ullyses by James Joyce. What a seriously over-hyped book. I bought it and have tried to read it 3 or 4 times, I can't get past the first 50 pages. I've really tried, but, ow, it's illegible.
I love the premise - a day, in real time, in Dublin, mirroring The Odyssey. But I just can't get involved with the characters.
On Odyssy mirrors, the film Brother, Where Art Thou was excellent.

I, too, never could get into Ulysses, but many well-read people say it's the best book written in the English language. My library has a continual sale on books they don't want. I picked up this multi-cassette audio edition of Ulysses for 50 cents. It's a performance with actors and music. I haven't listened to it yet. But maybe I'll get an idea about what is so great about Ulysses. It's from the BBC.

I will tell you the titles of 2 books which I feel are classics.

If you love Gothic stories, this is the one. Green Darkness by Anya Seton. It's about forbidden love and terror, reincarnation and retribution. Much of the book is written in old English. But it's mastered immediately and the tale is so rich. A wonderful book, which I've read 3 times cover to cover. The cover illustration on the book, origianally in 1973 seems lost to history. I loved that illustration -- of a monk and a young woman in the green darkness of a forest. What an excellent book.

And here's the best book I ever read written by a person to whom English was a second language: Lolita by Vladimir Nabokov. The tale is juicy and how he weaves words. It was a condemned book in the fifties.

kc440

[brooklyn44]

KC440 wrote:

And here's the best book I ever read written by a person to whom English was a second language: Lolita by Vladimir Nabokov. The tale is juicy and how he weaves words. It was a condemned book in the fifties.
"Juciy" is an unfortunate choice of word, I believe.

Nabokov has managed to write a beautiful prose work who's central theme and character are despicable. I guess it's difficult to be transgressive and brilliant at the same time. "Lolita" is an important book, but I never plan to reread it....it's too painful to witness human degradation.

[Brainache]

A pre 1900 book which I found fascinating was The Persian Letters. I think it was by Montesque(?). It is a satire of French society told in the form of letters from a Persian diplomat to his folks back home. I don't know if it is really a classic, but it appealed to me.

Post 1900 I have to say Lord Of The Rings. Sorry.
The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress is my favourite Heinlein.
Evolution by Stephen Baxter is post 2000, but should be read by everyone.

[sillyhead]

Wodehouse! Wodehouse! -jumps up and down clapping-

Oh. After 1900. Oh well, read it anyhow! SO fun! (:

[kc440_]

KC440 wrote:

Nabokov has managed to write a beautiful prose work who's central theme and character are despicable. I guess it's difficult to be transgressive and brilliant at the same time. "Lolita" is an important book, but I never plan to reread it....it's too painful to witness human degradation.

I don't think of Humbert Humbert as despicable. The girl is underage but she is so attractive. I think Humbert is a very sympathetic character. It is a great book. Today, of course, readers will look down at it because, say, of JonBenet Ramsey. But the girl in the book is more or less jail bait.

I thought the 2 movies were good, but I prefer the first one. Peter Sellars was great as usual.

kc440

[brooklyn44]

kc440:
huh? humbert humbert sympathetic?
he's a narcissiistic, pederastic murderer. in your opinion "jailbait" is a good thing?

[HeyLeroy]

"Kon-Tiki: Across the Pacific by Raft" by Thor Heyerdahl.

[orpheus]

Well, not to be contrarian, but I loved Ulysses. And Lolita as well. I didn't really have an opinion about Humbert Humbert - I kept getting distracted by Nabokov's virtuoso use of the language. Extraordinary!

The writer I keep going back to more than any other, though, is Beckett. He's simply become more and more important to me. I read Waiting for Godot and Endgame in high school, and was interested...then much later I started on his prose (which he considered his important work - more so than the plays). His trilogy Molloy; Malone Dies and The Unnamable are brilliant, funny and very moving. Imagination Dead Imagine is unlike anything else I've ever read. (Originally, it was 250 pages. He kept editing it until he arrived at the final published text - 4 pages. But it really is a full novel, just unbelievably concentrated. Reading it is like staring into the sun.)

And then, his very late "trilogy" (he never called it that): Company, Ill Seen Ill Said and Worstword Ho. These last, IMO, are serious contenders for being the finest English work since Shakespeare. (Pretty amazing, too, is the fact that he wrote Ill Seen Ill Said, like many of his works, in French, and then did his own English translation. And the French version is equally great.)

Of course, Joyce, Nabokov, and Beckett are all relatively recent guys, so I guess they don't count as classics for the purposes of this thread. For an older geezer, I recommend Dante. Allen Mandelbaum has a very fine translation of the Commedia, available in a bilingual edition. Very nice.

[orpheus]

oooh, I forgot this one: A Confederacy of Dunces by John Kennedy Toole.

Okay, so it's post-1900. But it will become a classic. Just give it time. And it's so funny.:czlaugh:

[orpheus]

About Ulysses: it helps to have read Dubliners and Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man first - especially Portrait. And also to have a good guidebook. I recommend James Joyce's Ulysses by Stuart Gilbert.

Might seem like a lot of work, but it's worth it. And these books are all good reads in and of themselves.

[Angus McPresley]

Skeptic - You have me intrigued. I had never heard of "Three Men in a Boat", nor its author, Jerome K. Jerome.


I was intrigued as well -- in fact, I went and got it from the library. I'm a third of the way through, and it's hilarious. Hard to believe it was written in 1889. Wodehouse that's pre-Wodehouse.

[Skeptic]

Another book I would recommend, highly, is the collection of short stories by Saki (H. H. Munro). Wodehouse was clearly influenced in his writing by both Jerome and Saki, which, of course, does nothing to diminish Wodehouse's own genius.

[TragicMonkey]

Another book I would recommend, highly, is the collection of short stories by Saki (H. H. Munro). Wodehouse was clearly influenced in his writing by both Jerome and Saki, which, of course, does nothing to diminish Wodehouse's own genius.

Hell, yes. I can't believe I forgot Saki. He's what you'd get if PG Wodehouse and Oscar Wilde had a baby.

[DangerousBeliefs]

Dune by Frank Herbert

Then watch the movies.

Then re-read the book.

Then after you think you know what's going on.... read the other dozen or two books.

----

Fafhrd and the Gray Mouser series by Fritz Leiber

Any of the works of Howard and Lovecraft (I really like the old Conans)

Journey to the Center of the Earth, Twenty Thousand Leagues Under the Sea, Around the World in Eighty Days by Jules Verne.

The Time Machine and The War of the Worlds by H. G. Wells. (Read The War of the Worlds... it was written in 1898!)

---

Old man and the sea by Hemmingway (Don't read it for all the symbolism crap they try and shovel you in school.)

[boooeee]

I was intrigued as well -- in fact, I went and got it from the library. I'm a third of the way through, and it's hilarious. Hard to believe it was written in 1889. Wodehouse that's pre-Wodehouse.Yes. I forgot to mention that that was the book I ended up reading. Absolutely fantastic. Had me tittering like an idiot all the way through. As a bonus, the version I bought also included "Three Men on the Bummel", a sequel of sorts. I'm reading that one now. So far, just as funny as "Three Men in a Boat".

I also bought "War and Peace", but my progress through that has been considerably slower.

[Skeptic]

Yes. I forgot to mention that that was the book I ended up reading. Absolutely fantastic. Had me tittering like an idiot all the way through. As a bonus, the version I bought also included "Three Men on the Bummel", a sequel of sorts. I'm reading that one now. So far, just as funny as "Three Men in a Boat".

I also bought "War and Peace", but my progress through that has been considerably slower.

The fun thing about the book is that it sticks in your memory. You'll never look at the Hampton Court maze or at picture-hanging the same way again...

[bigred]

Most anything by Shakespeare - read it first, then find a good film adaptation to see what they do with the text.

Personal favourites are King Lear, Titus Andronicus (the film from about five years ago was fantastic!), Twelfth Night, and Henry V.
ugh, I quite disagree with film adaptations, but excellent call overall.

I'd also nominate most anything by Poe, if you can handle the dreariness/darkness of it that is.

And if you dare to go past 1900, I highly suggest "Animal Farm" off the top of my head. Short read but a most excellent book IMO.

[headscratcher4]

Post 1900 -- The Master and Margarita, Bulgokov (sp?)

Many good ones listed here...throw in:

The Tale of Genji by the Lady Murasaki (11th Century Japanese Court novel)
The Alexiad by Anna Comnena -- history and intrieg at the Byzantine Court
The Secret History by Procopius -- sex and corruption at the Byzantine Court
The Satyricon by Petronius, sex and corruption in ancient Rome
The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire by Gibbons -- history has overtaken it, but still wonderfully written.

And, I second the Arabian Nights.

[bigred]

The Art of War - Sun Tzu:confused: I thought we were talking novels........maybe not though.



Starship Troopers by Robert HeinleinThe criteria was pre-1900. Even so, I would recommend most of his other works (well that I've read) over this one....

[Piggy]

Pre 1900....

To second some of what's already been said...

Huck Finn -- You must, must, must read this book again. This book is 19th century America. This book is American literature. I can't say enough about it. I can't think of any other work which is so emblematic of an epoch and a nation, and at the same time so amazingly brilliant in its pathos, its linguistic virtuosity, and its humor.

Don Quixote -- My only regret in recommending this book is that it's so much better, and so much funnier, in the original Spanish.

Heaney's translation of Beowulf -- Not only does he return the work to a poetic form truer to its roots than earlier translations, but he breathes life into what is, after all, an epic adventure.

Moby Dick -- Perhaps the most brilliant novel ever composed in English. But a virtuoso work, highly referential, not for everyone. Definitely not a must-read for casual readers, but if you love literature and religion, nothing compares.

Gulliver's Travels -- Absolutely hilarious, and as politically relevant today as it was in its time.

Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds -- The antiquated diction can be offputting, but there's nothing else quite like it. A true classic, and a fascinating read.

Dickens -- All of what has been mentioned, and more. This man invented the contemporary novel as we know it. A superb marketer who knew his audience and how to craft a book (or a serial) so that it would sell, and also a brilliant stylist and a master of concise description and quick humor.

The Bible -- Also not for everybody. Reading the Bible is a life's work, but well worth the effort, I think. It contains just about every genre you can think of, from liturgy to fable to allegory to ecstatic vision to political allegory to erotic poetry to genealogy to political diatribe to parts lists, on and on... amazingly rich and undeniably of central importance to Western literature. But very hard to understand, requires an enormous amount of reading in secondary texts to make sense of it. Right now I'm re-reading the Torah in order of composition, oldest bits first -- very enlightening... I'm seeing connections I hadn't guessed at before, and debunking spurious connections I'd assumed were meaningful.

To these I would add:

Leaves of Grass -- The foundation of modern American poetry. At least read Song of Myself. Or find a good selection which includes this and the best of the war poems.

Pinocchio -- Don't get anything dumbed-down or abridged. I highly recommend the edition illustrated by Greg Hildebrandt.

The Autobiography of Benjamin Franklin -- It's not the truth... anyone can tell the truth... it's much better than that!

Bacon's Essays -- Even today the man seems amazingly modern. If you're interested in thought and literature, you can't ignore this one. The best of the English Renaissance.

[Skeptic]

Post 1900 -- The Master and Margarita, Bulgokov (sp?)

Amazing book. Surely the best post-1900 novel by a Russian writer. On the same level of "classic" as "Lolita" and "Ulysses", though very different than both.

[Skeptic]

Moby Dick -- Perhaps the most brilliant novel ever composed in English. But a virtuoso work, highly referential, not for everyone. Definitely not a must-read for casual readers, but if you love literature and religion, nothing compares.

That's the one book I disagree with you about... yes, I've actually read it, but I just don't see what's so great about it. Perhaps the "whaling manual" parts in it put me off.

[Piggy]

That's the one book I disagree with you about... yes, I've actually read it, but I just don't see what's so great about it. Perhaps the "whaling manual" parts in it put me off.
Well, like I said, it ain't for everyone. It's extremely referential, to other literature and to world religions. The only well-known work I can think of these days that has the level of religious symbol play are the Matrix movies, which are absolutely packed with it. So the book is like one long inside joke mixed with shop talk. But if that's your shop, it's absolutely brilliant.

Btw, couldn't agree more re Master and Margarita, as well as Lolita.

[Garrette]

I feel a bit out of my league stepping in here, but decided to put in a penny's worth anyway.

First, I agree with all of Piggy's list except that I haven't read Don Quixote but have been told by several people I respect that I must. All the rest, I know of firsthand.

I emphatically agree with the descriptions of both Huckleberry Finn and Moby Dick, but would add that you cannot go wrong with anything by Melville.

I strongly recommend Melville's Battle Pieces, a collection of poems about the Civil War and the road to Reconstruction. Much of the poetry has a labored structure, but some of it is brilliant. And all of the poems have an intrinsic--and intrinsically American--beauty about them that is riveting.

If you can only read one, read The Housetop.

[bigred]

the Matrix movies, Did you have to mention that crapola? Now I feel like I need to go shower.

[Piggy]

Did you have to mention that crapola? Now I feel like I need to go shower.Y'know, I hated the first one -- I'm not into video games or comic books. But there's a lot of wonderful symbolic playfulness in those films which, for me, compensates for the cheesy gloss and Keanu's Eastwood-on-ludes acting style. By the end of the trilogy, I'd been captivated by the complex multi-religious symbology and the PK Dick-style multi-layered paranoia.

If I were still teaching, I might use these films as a point of departure for discussing intertextuality.

[bigred]

Admittedly saying this w/o having seen more than chunks of the last 2 here and there - as that's all I could stomach - these movies redefined bad movie making. Watching kids play "Mortal Kombat" on a video machine would be more interesting. In fact I doubt I could tell the diff when you get down to it. What little symbologies I recall were blatant, pointless, and boring....just like everything else about these aimless films. Shame too, as the the orig premise was good and the effects - although now way overused/overhyped -were good. Too bad they didn't have the time/interest in developing the script enough to make a legitimately good movie, relying instead on the Arnold action/effects angle...except they did it with the dopey Reaves vs muscle guy Arnold. Bleccch - some choice.

Sorry, just my .02.

[calebprime]

Montaigne essays. Any newer translation.

Nietzsche The Gay Science, and others. Not Zarathustra.

Moby Dick

Walt Whitman--any anthology of his poetry.

The only friends or self-help books you'll ever need.

[Aracan]

I am surprised that no one has mentioned Charlotte Bronte's (don't know how to do the dotted e) Jane Eyre. One of the finest books I've ever read, and there were quite a few of those already mentioned here among them.

[bigred]

I confess I'm amazed someone suggested Wuthering Heights. blech.

[Gargoyle]

Alexandre Dumas (both of them actually :) ) books - specially "Le Comte De Monte-Cristo" and "Three Musketeers". Really like adventures, ay!

Leo Tolsoy's "Anna Karenina" and "War and Peace". Explanaton not neccessary, I assume...

Henrik Ibsen - "Hedda Gabler", "Peer Gynt", "A Dolls House" and "Ghosts". Very good plays, both to read and see on stage!

Oh... Almost forgot; J.K Toole's "A Confederacy of Dunces" :p Just great!

[bigred]

Alexandre Dumas books - specially "Le Comte De Monte-Cristo" Yknow silly as this may sound, I am interested in reading this and "Les Miserables" as both movies were not just good movies in themselves, but somehow you could get a feel from the movies how great the books must be, ie all the complexities/progression of the plot etc.

[Gargoyle]

Yknow silly as this may sound, I am interested in reading this and "Les Miserables" as both movies were not just good movies in themselves, but somehow you could get a feel from the movies how great the books must be, ie all the complexities/progression of the plot etc.

First of all, I must say that there is nothing silly about reading good books, and those two are among the elite! They might have a oldfashioned linguistic usage, but don't let that scare you. It is a great asset to have read them, because a "classic" is a book that everyone have heard of but never actually read themselves. :cool: Run to the library now...

Second, do not compare films with the original book since they are two separate narrative styles. Often there is some modification of the storyline so it will fit the pace of films (but I do not think that is a problem with any of above books).

[bigred]

Thx but I think you missed my point.....it seems a little silly to want to read book based on the movie adaptation.

[Gargoyle]

Thx but I think you missed my point.....it seems a little silly to want to read book based on the movie adaptation.

Well, I'm inclined to agree that it is silly (no offense) to read that kind of books. They are more than often badly written, simplistic and one-dimensional.

I never read books based on a film based on a book, specially if it's based on a classic. :boggled: It does not exist in my world because it usually is a total waste of time.... Always keep to the original ;)

[bigred]

You again didn't get it. Never mind.

[Gargoyle]

:rolleyes:

[Piggy]

:rolleyes:
No, seriously, you didn't get it.

[bigred]

No, seriously, you didn't get it.I know. Twice. Wasn't trying to take a shot or anything. But really, I think it's well worth dropping....

Back to the classics. Am I the only Shakespeare fan who just can't get into the "historical works?"

[Kullervo]

Three from the 20th century

Twelve Chairs and The Little Golden Calf by Ilf and Petrov

The Good Soldier Svejk by Hasek.

[Orangutan]

Grendel

[Skeptic]

The Good Soldier Svejk by Hasek.

Far better than "Catch-22", which it deeply influenced.

"Catch-22" is clever and funny; "The Good Soldier Svejk" is a work of genius.

[delphi_ote]

War and Peace.

Right now, I'm the only person I know who has read that book. I'm not sure why everyone is so down on it. That book completely changed the way I think about history.

ETA Jorghnassen beat me to it!

[delphi_ote]

Let's not forget "Les Miserables", eh? Or "The Miserables" if you like, though the original title's got a certain tone to it...
Halfway through it now. Not particularly fond of the romantic melodrama. It also doesn't seem to have anything particularly interesting to say about the human condition.

Moby Dick, on the other hand... wow.

ETA and if you want an amazing post 1900 book, Gabrel Garcia's 100 Years of Solitude will knock your socks off.

[Skeptic]

War and Peace.

Right now, I'm the only person I know who has read that book

I've read it, and know many who do. Yes, it DOES change your view of history.

[Skeptic]

ETA and if you want an amazing post 1900 book, Gabrel Garcia's 100 Years of Solitude will knock your socks off.

Apart from being a superb work, it also has the best opening sentence in the history of literatrue. Talk about hooking the reader from the start.

[bigred]

War and Peace.
Right now, I'm the only person I know who has read that book. I'm not sure why everyone is so down on it. It's 10,000 pages long. :cool:


Halfway through it now. Not particularly fond of the romantic melodrama. It also doesn't seem to have anything particularly interesting to say about the human condition.:confused:

[delphi_ote]

I've read it, and know many who do. Yes, it DOES change your view of history.
Apparently I hang out in the wrong crowds. Computer science majors never read anything.
Apart from being a superb work, it also has the best opening sentence in the history of literatrue. Talk about hooking the reader from the start.
It has a hell of an ending as well. You can definitely close the book at that point. After I read it, I couldn't help but think the book couldn't possibly have ended any other way. But at the same time, I know I never could've imagined anything so perfect myself.
:confused:
Like I said, I'm only halfway through it. My opinion may change by the end. While I enjoyed War and Peace, I didn't see what Tolstoy was constructing until the end. Maybe the same can be said of Les Miserables. So far, the only messages I see are, "You really really really really really can't escape your past" and something vague about redemption.

[Piggy]

Moby Dick, on the other hand... wow.
Another convert! YES!!! :cool:

[TriangleMan]

It's 10,000 pages long. :cool:
It's shorter than the Lord of the Rings trilogy but that didn't seem to put anyone off reading LotR.

That said -- I haven't read War and Peace :p

[bigred]

It's shorter than the Lord of the Rings trilogy but that didn't seem to put anyone off reading LotR.

That said -- I haven't read War and Peace :pYou definition of "anyone" seems to be pretty narrow. ;) I thought the hobbit was great but gave up ever reading the LOTR trilogy and precisely because it often is so pointlessly wordy...zzzzz....

[Soapy Sam]

I tried W&P again recently. Got to page 4 hundred and something before losing interest. Maybe it's an age thing.

[TriangleMan]

You definition of "anyone" seems to be pretty narrow. ;)
Well anybody who is anybody has read LotR y'know. ;)

[delphi_ote]

I tried W&P again recently. Got to page 4 hundred and something before losing interest. Maybe it's an age thing.
Or just a difference in taste, maybe.

You do really have to be patient with that book for the payoff. It's brilliantly written, but the interweaving of multitude of perspectives he gives of the human condition from different scales of space and time and intimacy don't tie together into a coherent whole until the end of the novel.