What is the most difficult modern English book to understand?

[robert_columbia]

What is the most difficult to understand book, poem, or other document that is written in Modern English (yes, this includes Shakespeare and the King James Bible, but doesn't include Chaucer)?

1) Which is the most difficult because of fundamental language issues, such as archaic grammar or vocabulary, uncommon vocabulary (not directly inherent in the subject matter of the book, such as unnecessary use of "whereas" and "heretofore"), uncommon spellings of words, or long, complex and convoluted sentence structure?
2) Which is most difficult not because of fundamental grammar, vocabulary, or structural issues, but because the subject matter of the book is arcane to people today, such as a book on chivalry that is difficult to understand because it presupposes that the reader is intimately familar with the nuances of social issues involving nobility and uses vocabulary related to great country estates that is unfamilar to people today?
3) What recent (e.g. late 20th century or later) modern work is most difficult to understand because of required subject matter knowledge, such as a complex PhD dissertation or scientific journal article?

Is the answer different if you limit yourself to poetry, novels, scientific writings, commercial documents, or some other category?

[Athena]

Anything by James Joyce.

You can close the thread now.

[Tom Scud]

Originally Posted by Athena

Anything by James Joyce.

Nonsense. Finnegans Wake stands head and shoulders above the rest of his work in terms of difficulty.

[Zjestika]

Riddley Walker is written in, uh, post-apocalyptic dialect, I guess? Phonetically might be a better way to describe it. I've tried to read it several times and when I put it down I don't pick it back up. It's really challenging.

[Tom Scud]

Incidentally, the full text of Finnegans Wake.

[njtt]

Originally Posted by Tom Scud

Nonsense. Finnegans Wake stands head and shoulders above the rest of his work in terms of difficulty.

This.

As for non-fictional stuff, it is obviously going to be relative to the reader's prior knowledge and aptitudes. Still Principia Mathematica must be up there (Russell and Whitehead, not Newton). One also hears bad things about Hegel's Phenomenology of Spirit.

[elbows]

"The Glass Bead Game", by Hermann Hesse.

Yeah, yeah, it won the Nobel Prize, it was still a slog to get through, and I adored some of his other books!

[guizot]

I don't know how a question such as this, accompanied by the parameters as it is, could lead to any kind of meaningful answers. Comprehension is determined by such a broad array of subjective and contextual factors. But it should a least result in an interesting list of "books I didn't like."

[robert_columbia]

Originally Posted by guizot

I don't know how a question such as this, accompanied by the parameters as it is, could lead to any kind of meaningful answers. Comprehension is determined by such a broad array of subjective and contextual factors. But it should a least result in an interesting list of "books I didn't like."

Well, try this. We'll say the reader is a college educated (BS or BA) person from an English speaking country. Their degree is in something other than the immediate subject matter of the book or something closely related (e.g. if the book is an advanced treatise on tactics of the War of 1812, then their degree might be in Computer Science, or if the book is on quantum physics then they may have a degree in Journalism) They speak and read only a standard English dialect (e.g. US or British), and don't have any specialized training in rural or nonstandard dialects that the average person doesn't have. They have had some exposure to Shakespeare and the King James Bible but are not experts.

[Baron Greenback]

Originally Posted by njtt

Still Principia Mathematica must be up there (Russell and Whitehead, not Newton).

Who can fail to be moved by this passage from page 362 of volume 1?

[Truman Burbank]

I've never found anything more challenging than Finnegan's Wake, and cannot now remember how far I got when reading it (or attempting to).

[smsaks2000]

Gravity's Rainbow by Thomas Pynchon. Brutal....

[drewtwo99]

Originally Posted by Baron Greenback

Who can fail to be moved by this passage from page 362 of volume 1?

Brings a tear to my eye. Thank you for sharing.

Finnegans Wake is not a book. It's a joke. It's also only arguably English, so it gets disqualified for two reasons.

[aesop]

I have tried to get through Faulkner's As I Lay Dying at least twice. You know how if at first you don't succeed you're supposed to try, try again? Whoever said that never read Faulkner.

[tapu]

Infinite Jest --David Foster Wallace.

Damn compelling, though.

Not sure if it could beat out Finnegan's Wake or Joyce....

[Thudlow Boink]

Originally Posted by njtt

One also hears bad things about Hegel's Phenomenology of Spirit.

Originally Posted by elbows

"The Glass Bead Game", by Hermann Hesse.

Both of which were originally written in German. Since the OP mentioned the King James Bible, I assume that doesn't disqualify them, but it does leave open the question of whether it's the original work or the translation that's being judged difficult to understand.

[Manda JO]

Originally Posted by guizot

I don't know how a question such as this, accompanied by the parameters as it is, could lead to any kind of meaningful answers. Comprehension is determined by such a broad array of subjective and contextual factors. But it should a least result in an interesting list of "books I didn't like."

You know, I love, love, love Paradise Lost, but I'll be the first to say it's not easy going.

[Dervorin]

Another vote for Finnegan's Wake. Every few years I

• Decide I should try again
• Pick it up, full of determination and enthusiasm
• Struggle manfully through a few pages (I think the record is 10)
• Give up in complete and utter bewilderment
• Whimper and swear off FW forever

It's a book for taking to a desert island. So that you can start fires with it, and rejoice with every flaming page.

[robert_columbia]

Originally Posted by Thudlow Boink

Both of which were originally written in German. Since the OP mentioned the King James Bible, I assume that doesn't disqualify them, but it does leave open the question of whether it's the original work or the translation that's being judged difficult to understand.

If the book wasn't originally in English, then it's a specific translation.

I intentionally put this question in IMHO. I'm interested in different opinions on "the most difficult". I know that there aren't clear, measurable criteria for this and am interested in what people think about when they think about books or other works that are difficult to understand.

[2ManyTacos]

Holy shit. I remember having to read The Scarlett Letter in the 11th grade and wanting to tear the fucking book to shreds the entire time. It's been a few years since then so maybe now I could get a better handle on it, but gawddamn that book made no fucking sense to me at the time.

[lisiate]

I agree with the Finnegan's Wake nomination. A friend of mine who majored in English confessed to me once that it's the only assigned novel he never finished, and he was a very conscientious student. I've never even tried after flicking through the first few pages.

I've read The Glass Bead Game and Gravity's Rainbow and to my mind while Hesse is a bit tedious the sheer mind fuck of Pynchon is harder to get through. I swear I was in a bit of an altered state for a good week or two after finishing Gravity's Rainbow.

As for the non-fiction I'd argue that Russell and Whitehead's Principia isn't actually in English. I can't decide what the most difficult non-fiction book I've encountered is though.

[thelurkinghorror]

Originally Posted by elbows

"The Glass Bead Game", by Hermann Hesse.

Yeah, yeah, it won the Nobel Prize, it was still a slog to get through, and I adored some of his other books!

To be fair, maybe Das Glasperlenspiel reads better and it's all the translator's fault. But knowing German, probably not.

Originally Posted by smsaks2000

Gravity's Rainbow by Thomas Pynchon. Brutal....

It didn't have more pages than some other books I read, nor more chapters. But it is the longest book I've ever read. Took me a good part of a year, on and off. There's a Song of Ice and Fire-sized cast and the language itself isn't too bad or esoteric, but it's one of those books that requires a ledger to figure out what is going on (there's a website for that, too). I first checked it out of a library, read a few pages, and realized that there would be no way I could finish in time without buying it. I also read V., which was difficult too but not nearly as much.

[beowulff]

Originally Posted by Zjestika

Riddley Walker is written in, uh, post-apocalyptic dialect, I guess? Phonetically might be a better way to describe it. I've tried to read it several times and when I put it down I don't pick it back up. It's really challenging.

This.

I’ve been halfway through it for two years.

[Ms Boods]

If my students are any indication, it would be either the MLA Handbook or the general rules of grammar and style manual they are required to use for their freshman gut English class.

[Little Nemo]

Originally Posted by Baron Greenback

Who can fail to be moved by this passage from page 362 of volume 1?

You just know they were meant to be together and when they finally make it through all the obstacles along the way ... call me sentimental but I tear up every time I see that little = sign and know they've finally joined together.

[Yllaria]

Originally Posted by Baron Greenback

Who can fail to be moved by this passage from page 362 of volume 1?

I thought the full phrase included all 362 pages. I remember a talking head in a documentary on mathematics saying something that I thought implied that. (The first half or more of the documentary got taped over (probably by an episode of Doctor Who (old version)), so I don't remember the title.)

Originally Posted by lisiate

. . . As for the non-fiction I'd argue that Russell and Whitehead's Principia isn't actually in English. . . . .

I'd be willing to stipulate that.

[Little Nemo]

For anyone who doubts Finnegan's Wake's claim to the title:

So vi et! we responded. Song! Shaun, song! Have mood! Hold forth!

I apologuise, Shaun began, but I would rather spinooze you one from the grimm gests of Jacko and Esaup, fable one, feeble too. Let us here consider the casus, my dear little cousis (husstenhasstencaffincoffintussemtossemdamandamnacosaghcusaghhobixhatouxpeswchbechoscashlcarcarcarac t) of the Ondt and the Gracehoper.

The Gracehoper was always jigging ajog, hoppy on akkant of his joyicity, (he had a partner pair of findlestilts to supplant him), or, if not, he was always making ungraceful overtures to Floh and Luse and Bienie and Vespatilla to play pupa-pupa and pulicy-pulicy and langtennas and pushpygyddyum and to commence insects with him, there mouthparts to his orefice and his gambills to there airy processes, even if only in chaste, ameng the everlistings, behold a waspering pot. He would of curse melissciously, by his fore feelhers, flexors, contractors, depressors and extensors, lamely, harry me, marry me, bury me, bind me, till she was puce for shame and allso fourmish her in Spinner's housery at the earthsbest schoppinhour so summery as his cottage, which was cald fourmillierly Tingsomingenting, groped up. Or, if he was always striking up funny unereels with Besterfarther Zeuts, the Aged One, With all his wigeared corollas, albedinous and oldbuoyant, inscythe his elytrical wormcasket and Dehlia and Peonia, his druping nymphs, bewheedling him, compound eyes on hornitosehead, and Auld Letty Plussiboots to scratch his cacumen and cackle his tramsitus, diva deborah (seven bolls of sapo, a lick of lime, two spurts of fussfor, threefurts of sulph, a shake o'shouker, doze grains of migniss and a mesfull of midcap pitchies. The whool of the whaal in the wheel of the whorl of the Boubou from Bourneum has thus come to taon!), and with tambarins and cantoridettes soturning around his eggshill rockcoach their dance McCaper in retrophoebia, beck from bulk, like fantastic disossed and jenny aprils, to the ra, the ra, the ra, the ra, langsome heels and langsome toesis, attended to by a mutter and doffer duffmatt baxingmotch and a myrmidins of pszozlers pszinging Satyr's Caudledayed Nice and Hombly, Dombly Sod We Awhile but Ho, Time Timeagen, Wake! For if sciencium (what's what) can mute uns nought, 'a thought, abought the Great Sommboddy within the Omniboss, perhops an artsaccord (hoot's hoot) might sing ums tumtim abutt the Little Newbuddies that ring his panch. A high old tide for the barheated publics and the whole day as gratiis! Fudder and lighting for ally looty, any filly in a fog, for O'Cronione lags acrumbling in his sands but his sunsunsuns still tumble on. Erething above ground, as his Book of Breathings bed him, so as everwhy, sham or shunner, zeemliangly to kick time.

[Labrador Deceiver]

Sartor Resartus by Thomas Carlyle was a real hoot, let me tell you.

[rivulus]

Originally Posted by Little Nemo

For anyone who doubts Finnegan's Wake's claim to the title:

Apropos of nothing... this reminds me of when I was hunkered down in the library stacks one day trying to skim a musicology article in Dutch about a Renaissance era Flemish organist, knowing English and German, and getting this close to understanding it, but not quite because I was missing a few words here and there of technical language.

Only Joyce has puns too and general silliness. But it helps to read it out loud, I find.

[Derleth]

There are any number of textbooks most here would have absolutely no purchase on were they to assay them because they assume you have technical knowledge most here do not have. It is frustrating unto madness to be attempting to read a math book and find notation you don't know that the author is not going to explain. It's completely opaque in a way not even Finnegans Wake can match. You might as well try to scramble up a smooth glass window. However, once you have the requisite background, most mathematical books aren't difficult to read; they require care, attention, and time, but they're not insurmountable.

If you dismiss mathematics, Hegel has a terrible reputation of having written some real slogs. How much of this is due to sub-par translations from the German and how much is due to Hegel I don't know; Boltzmann seemed to think Hegel's work was inherently muddy, and he presumably read it in the original.

[Idle Thoughts]

Moving over to Cafe Society.

[PlainJain]

Well, I guess the thread has been won but still I'll add:
Pygmy
by Chuck Palahniuk

Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance
by Robt. Pirsig

Originally Posted by Baron Greenback

Who can fail to be moved by this passage from page 362 of volume 1?

::swoon::

[Infovore]

Originally Posted by PlainJain

Well, I guess the thread has been won but still I'll add:
Pygmy
by Chuck Palahniuk

Aww...I thought I was gonna make it to the end of the thread and have something to contribute, but you beat me to it! :P

Actually, though, I found Pygmy to be easier than I expected to read once I got the hang of the language.

[don't mind me]

I've read Gravity's Rainbow more than seven times. I lost count after that. I'm not sure if I'm proud or ashamed, but don't ask me what it's about. Still, it's my favorite modern novel.

I was a (sexual) virgin the first time. Warped me for life, it did.

[Nava]

Originally Posted by lisiate

I've read The Glass Bead Game and Gravity's Rainbow and to my mind while Hesse is a bit tedious the sheer mind fuck of Pynchon is harder to get through. I swear I was in a bit of an altered state for a good week or two after finishing Gravity's Rainbow.

If books requiring or causing altered states count, then I nominate The Illuminatus Trillogy. I managed to slog through it without the aid of pot or hallucinogenics (thanks, or maybe not, to being pretty much locked in by snow with an extremely slow and highly filtered internet connection for several weeks), but the book itself should probably be handled only under controlled conditions.

I'm afraid to approach Finnegan's Wake... I'm wondering whether it is the book that inspired Miguel Delibes' opera prima, the much-lauded and absolutely horrible Five Hours with Mario (and I love every single other one of his books).


Having now read Nemo's contribution, ok, it was not what inspired Delibes, but - bloody hell! That's legal to own, distribute and sell?

[thelurkinghorror]

Originally Posted by don't mind me

I've read Gravity's Rainbow more than seven times. I lost count after that. I'm not sure if I'm proud or ashamed, but don't ask me what it's about. Still, it's my favorite modern novel.

I was a (sexual) virgin the first time. Warped me for life, it did.

It was YOU who caused all those disasters in England soon after you visited!?


Since we're talking about Finnegans Wake, and it's now in CS, I will take the time to mention Sleepytime Gorilla Museum's "Headless Corpses Reenactment", which consists of lyrics taken from the novel to scary effect.

[KarlGauss]

Not too long ago, I was considering whether I should give Roger Penrose's The Road to Reality: A Complete Guide to the Laws of the Universe a shot. Then, I read some of its reviews (many of which were by people with rather advanced training in math and physics). "On second thought, maybe not".

[Busy Scissors]

The hardest novels are those that mix a tough prose style with challenging themes and ideas. Books like Ulysses and The sound and the fury are chewy as hell in places, but they're thematically pretty simple. Ulysses is at heart just a book about people.
Someone like Pynchon is on another level - you've got the same dense prose that can be a real battle, but used to describe fantastical theories of world governance and order. I think Gravity's Rainbow benefits from being so dazzling that it keeps the pages turning - something like Mason and Dixon is more subtle and, to be honest, a real ballache.

Finnegan's Wake does sort of stand alone - although I await the, er, pleasure of reading it. There must be a few of these type of books self-published by nobodies - can't be too many examples where a revered author just decides to take things to their logical conclusion and dish up total impenetrability.

[Meurglys]

Bob Dylan's Tarantula was pretty heavy going - all bizarre imagery and nonsense! Some quite memorable but it was almost like reading pages of random words at times...
(I read it back in the 70s so I might be mis-remembering and doing it an injustice, but I don't think so!)

[DZedNConfused]

The Universe in A Nutshell by Stephen Hawking went so far over my head the trees swayed. I liked it just didn't understand it...

I've tried twice on Ancient Evenings, but I suspect that's more a failing of mine than Mailer's....

[timid1]

I'm here for Gravity's Rainbow. Embarrassed to admit that I've started it 5 times and have not finished it. It's a WTF am I doing reading this thing. I have read and even enjoyed the rest
of Pychon's work,especially V. However the albatross that Gravity's Rainbow is to me still haunts.

[pulykamell]

Originally Posted by Manda JO

You know, I love, love, love Paradise Lost, but I'll be the first to say it's not easy going.

I personally didn't think Paradise Lost was all that bad. At least it reads as in English and you can get a feel for what's going on. There's nothing particularly tricky language-wise happening there. Finnegens Wake, though. There's just nothing that I've encountered in the same league in terms of impenetrability.

[Animastryfe]

Originally Posted by robert_columbia

Well, try this. We'll say the reader is a college educated (BS or BA) person from an English speaking country. Their degree is in something other than the immediate subject matter of the book or something closely related (e.g. if the book is an advanced treatise on tactics of the War of 1812, then their degree might be in Computer Science, or if the book is on quantum physics then they may have a degree in Journalism) They speak and read only a standard English dialect (e.g. US or British), and don't have any specialized training in rural or nonstandard dialects that the average person doesn't have. They have had some exposure to Shakespeare and the King James Bible but are not experts.

I don't like this. For example, multivariable calculus is not particularly difficult, but it would be incomprehensible to someone with no knowledge of single variable calculus. Similarly, a textbook for the first two semesters of quantum mechanics is probably not the most difficult textbook a physics major will encounter, but it will be meaningless to someone who has never taken a university physics course.

More generally speaking, this criteria ignores prior knowledge, which may be very easy to learn, that could significantly decrease the difficulty level of the book.

[Smeghead]

I think it was io9.com that, a month or so ago, had a list of sci-fi books that people claim to have read but really haven't, complete with quotes from various authors explaining why we should really go and actually read each book. Gravity's Rainbow was on the list, but they weren't able to find anyone who genuinely HAD read it to explain to the rest of us why it's worth it.

[Mahaloth]

Originally Posted by 2ManyTacos

Holy shit. I remember having to read The Scarlett Letter in the 11th grade and wanting to tear the fucking book to shreds the entire time. It's been a few years since then so maybe now I could get a better handle on it, but gawddamn that book made no fucking sense to me at the time.

Are you sure? It's not that complicated or difficult to understand. It's pretty straight forward, actually.

[Exapno Mapcase]

I read a page of Fifty Shades of Gray and I'm absolutely certain I'll never read second.

[Sitnam]

I found House of Leaves by Mark Z. Danielewski difficult. The confused side notes, digressions and asides are part of the theme and I'm pretty sure you aren't even supposed to make sense of it.

Still isn't Finnegan's Wake though.

[Philliam]

Originally Posted by beowulff

This.

I’ve been halfway through it for two years.

Don't give up on it - the reveal is brilliant.

[Baron Greenback]

Originally Posted by Exapno Mapcase

I read a page of Fifty Shades of Gray and I'm absolutely certain I'll never read second.

You need to skip forward to about page 78 for the porn. It's still terrible though. Really, really bad. It makes Anais Nin seem good, and that's a very low bar.

[njtt]

Originally Posted by Thudlow Boink

Both of which were originally written in German. Since the OP mentioned the King James Bible, I assume that doesn't disqualify them, but it does leave open the question of whether it's the original work or the translation that's being judged difficult to understand.

Fair enough, but I think Hegel is supposed to be pretty tough going in the original German too.

Personally I had no problems with Hesse's The Glass Bead Game (in translation). It may be a bit dull compared to his other books, but I don't recall it as being difficult to follow.

¬¬¬¬¬¬¬

I haven't read Gravity's Rainbow, but I found Pynchon's V pretty hard going. (By contrast, The Crying of Lot 49 was quite fun.)

¬¬¬¬¬¬¬

Originally Posted by Baron Greenback

Who can fail to be moved by this passage from page 362 of volume 1?

Well, that twist only really works after they have been building the tension for the previous 361 pages.