Two books are at the top of my list, both semi-political in nature, are 1984 and Uncle Tom’s Cabin, the first of which I hadn’t read until I was about 50 years old but had spent the previous 30 years speaking knowledgeably about, referring to Big Brother, and Newspeak, and “We have always been at war with Eastasia” and such. It turned out to be a pretty nifty novel, with real characters and everything,
Right now, I’m reading Uncle Tom’s Cabin for the first time. For a mid-19th century novel, it reads surprisingly fluidly. I’m “reading” it on audiotape so I’m spared the annoying dialect, but it’s far from the polemic I expected. Subtle characters, unexpected plot developments, etc. One thing I’ve been surprised by was the placement and brevity of the escaped slave woman on the ice floes of the Ohio River–if I ever spoke about the scene (and I may have) I’m sure I described it as both “climactic” and “extended” when actually it is neither.
True, although it clearly does have its “propaganda” aspects (there are elements of the novel that are there because Stowe had a point to make and not just for literary reasons).
Maybe because that scene looms larger in theatrical adaptations, or in the use made of it in “The King and I.”
But “don’t feel like I’d get anything out of reading it” isn’t the same thing as “feel qualified to talk about it.”
And I’m not sure it even makes sense to talk about the Bible as a book that one has or has not read, since it’s an anthology of a wide variety of Hebrew and Christian writings.
Still, it’s true that many people feel qualified to talk about it without having read it.
Getting back to the main topic of the thread, there are books that I haven’t read, and may or may not ever get around to reading, but that I’ve heard or read enough about that I feel qualified to say something intelligent about them. (Nabokov’s Lolita is one example that springs to mind.)
My brother is a Gannon University graduate. He has a degree in Chemistry and one in Mathematics (Statistics). He’s an intelligent guy. Gannon required a course in the bible. Exams were open book. He devised a way of tabbing the book to find specific spots quickly.
He ended up with an A, although he is pretty sure he was cheating. Cheating with a bible is sort of interesting.
I mean, “finding specific spots quickly” is exactly why the Bible was divided up into chapters and verses to begin with. Not to mention concordances and commentaries and devotionals and references and red letter editions and glossaries, there’s a massive ecosystem for the sort of thing your brother did. Christian bookstores devote more shelf space to books that help you navigate the bible than the actual bible itself.
I would cite that as a major reason why so many Christians have such a weird perspective of what the Bible actually says. They spend more time listening to sermons and reading about what the bible says than actually reading the bible for themselves.
Unless you have read Joyce’s Ulysses, I will let the fact that a copy of it sits on my shelf and I read some but far from all of it in a college class a million years ago justify my having opinions and perspectives on that book.
I mean, if American so-called Christians can try to run our lives based on a book they’ve never read, then I can at least talk about it without having read it.
Nothing I’ve seen quoted is groundbreaking (Guess what, current prisons are modern day slavery!) And it repeats the bizarre “Britain actually was the most progressive nation in terms of abolition!” myth as a foundational talking point. Yes tell me more about how it was better to be an enslaved African man in the British Colonies than a Free American Black Man in 1900.
She I was young, my mother got me a shelf full of the scholastic illustrated classics- heavily condensed version of classic literature with illustrations on every other page. Reading those got me through high school English easily.
Atlas Shrugged- couldn’t get more than fifty pages in, but I know it’s crap.
I’ve read several antivaccine books (risking my cerebral cortex in the process), and feel qualified to comment on many others in the genre, seeing as how book blurbs and reviews confirm that they recycle the same tired old bogus antivax memes.
For instance, I’m confident that (ex) Dr. Thomas Cowan’s “The Contagion Myth” is raging bullshit, seeing that he argues in it that viruses don’t cause disease and the Covid-19 pandemic is due to 5G.
A typical response from the antivax crowd when you diss something like that online is “Did you read the book? Didja? I bet you didn’t read the book.”
Really? I’m supposed to buy it, when the author(s) have been busy promulgating their crap all over the Internet and it’s available for free?
Regarding Uncle Tom’s Cabin, there are two separate areas to talk about.
I haven’t read the book. So I’m not qualified to discuss it as a work of literature. I can’t offer informed opinions on things like the dialogue or character development or themes.
But I feel I can discuss its historical impact even though I haven’t read the novel. The way the book affected public opinion in the period leading up to the Civil War is separate from the book itself.
That’s how I felt about 1984, and about Uncle Tom’s Cabin (which I’m halfway through). Thing is, I have much more nuanced opinions about a book once I’ve read it–for example, I see Stowe’s appeal to family and to Christianity as much more significant now–I thought it was largely political and polemical when I understood only the novel’s historical significance.
Likewise, my view of 1984 is now that it is a book about human psychology as much as it is about world politics.