# Which of these classic books should I read first? **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [August 31, 2001, 3:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-of-these-classic-books-should-i-read-first/79065 "2001-08-31T03:16:04Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Ukulele\_Ike](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/df788c/32.png) [@Ukulele\_Ike](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ukulele_Ike)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2001, 1:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-of-these-classic-books-should-i-read-first/79065/21 "2001-08-31T13:08:04Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by gallows fodder \* > \*\*I would recommend Nightwood by Djuna Barnes. \*\* Yeah Yeah Yeah! GREAT book! ---
**Author:** ![Munch](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/munch/32/5281_2.png) [@Munch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Munch)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2001, 2:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-of-these-classic-books-should-i-read-first/79065/22 "2001-08-31T14:52:28Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by RickJay \* > I highly recommend The Sound and the Fury. It is truly a masterpeice of English literature, and a pleasure to read. \*\* I think that RickJay and I have exact opposite definitions of the word “pleasure”. That book is painful! (But certainly worth reading, I must add.) ---
**Author:** ![Dinsdale](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/97f17d/32.png) [@Dinsdale](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dinsdale)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2001, 3:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-of-these-classic-books-should-i-read-first/79065/23 "2001-08-31T15:11:51Z")
I would definitely read \*\* Far From the Madding Crowd\*\* first, followed by **War and Peace**. Read **Ulysses** if you want to say you did, but get a study guide and forget the idea of deriving any entertainment from it. At least you’ll have a good excuse for a party every June 16. (And give yourself a prize if you make it past those damned oxen). Then follow it up with Proust’s ROTP … Faulkner, a better drunk than writer. Sure, read him after you’re through punishing yourself with Ulysses. Rand and Pirsig certainly were (and continue to be in some circles) popular, but classic? Might as well pick up Johnathon Livingston Seagull as well. Nothing wrong with reading them. Mildly entertaining light reads. IMO, the only keeper in your list is **Walden**. ---
**Author:** ![gobear](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/8dc957/32.png) [@gobear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gobear)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2001, 3:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-of-these-classic-books-should-i-read-first/79065/24 "2001-08-31T15:30:21Z")
Toss the Rand and the Pirsig books into your paper recycling bin. They are both utter crap, responsible for ruining more impressionable minds than drugs and TV combined. Read the Faulkner first. His narrative style takes soem geting used to, but he is, IMHO, the greatest American novelist, ever. His psychological insight and his verbal wizardry make him the crown jewel of American lit. I’d start off with **Light in August** first, though. **Ulysses** is a phenomenal work, but you need to get a good annotated guide to read alongisde it in order to get some of the more obscure literary, mythological, and linguistic references. It helps to have read Homer’s **Odyssey** first, since the events and characters are drawn from Homer. **Walden** is a short, easy-to-read book, but it does have its slow moments. My list of other authors you MUST read would include the following: Thomas Hardy. I’d start with **Tess of the D’Urbervilles, The Mayor of Casterbridge** ,or \*\* Far From the Madding Crowd\*\*. Marcel Proust. You should at least read **Swann’s Way** , the first volume of his monumental work, **In Search of Lost Time**. Anthony Trollope, for my money the greatest of the 19th century English novelists. **Barchester Towers** is a laugh out loud funny book ---
**Author:** ![Dinsdale](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/97f17d/32.png) [@Dinsdale](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dinsdale)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2001, 3:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-of-these-classic-books-should-i-read-first/79065/25 "2001-08-31T15:47:24Z")
[QUOTE] \*Originally posted by gobear \* …his monumental work, **In Search of Lost Time**. LOL. Made me giggle, remembering my buddy getting all worked up, “Absolutely nothing in the title can be translated as ‘Remembrance.’” I have my mom’s collection of Trollope, with the bookmark where she placed it the evening she went to bed and didn’t wake up. Good to see another Hardy fan out there. ---
**Author:** ![Lucifer12](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/b38774/32.png) [@Lucifer12](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lucifer12)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2001, 4:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-of-these-classic-books-should-i-read-first/79065/26 "2001-08-31T16:14:49Z")
I’ll throw in my 2 pennies: I agree with most of you about Ann Rand - her books stink. As literature, they don’t make a blip on the radar. And although I’m big on classics, I haven’t read any of your llisted books (other than about 75 pages of Atlas Shrugged-I couldn’t take anymore), so I can’t offer you any advice. But here’s a couple you might consider: _The Power And The Glory_ Graham Greene ## I can’t recommed this one enough-it’s one of Greene’s best novels IMO. _Hard Times_ Charles Dickens ## It’s a very small book for Dickens, and bit more modern and hard-edged than his more famous books, but well worth the read. _Farmer_ Jim Harrison ## My favorite Harrison novel. Just thinking about it makes me want to re-read it! Also, try some collections of classic short stories/novellas. Get a collection of Henry James, or Poe, or Twain, etc. They’re usaully pretty cheap and make for excellent bedtime reading! And with more difficult authors (Henry James comes to mind), it’s an great way to test the waters before jumping in with some 500 page novel. ---
**Author:** ![Chance\_the\_Gardener](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/eada6e/32.png) [@Chance\_the\_Gardener](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chance_the_Gardener)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2001, 4:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-of-these-classic-books-should-i-read-first/79065/27 "2001-08-31T16:19:45Z")
_Walden_ is a good one to start with, particularly if you’ve never read many of the classics. If you have read many classics but not _Walden_, it’s still good to pick it up. However, I think it serves you better if you read it when you’re younger. Same with _Catcher in the Rye_. I tried to hack through _The Sound and the Fury_ in my early twenties and just couldn’t do it. I’ve sworn to get back to it, but haven’t yet. No comment for now. _Ulysses_ is not the one to start reading Joyce with. I have to go with **gallows fodder** and say that _A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man_ is a far better intro to Joyce. _Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance_ is, as others have pointed out, pop psychology and of little real worth. I can’t say I found it very inspiring, but it was mildly entertaining. I’m reluctant to call it a “classic”. A better word to describe it would be “overrated”. _Atlas Shrugged_ is excellent if you have a birdcage. You’ll be able to keep it lined for months. **custard dragon** is right: Ayn Rand will put you off books altogether. I read _Atlas Shrugged_ some years ago, and it had that effect on me. I stopped reading for months afterward. ---
**Author:** ![Dinsdale](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/97f17d/32.png) [@Dinsdale](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dinsdale)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2001, 4:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-of-these-classic-books-should-i-read-first/79065/28 "2001-08-31T16:21:19Z")
Jim Harrison. Mmmm. I’d really love to run into him in a dive on one of my may trips up to Michigan. A Good Day to Die Sun Dog Legends On another tack, was there ever a movie that had less to do with the book than Wolf? I’ll toss this up as another post instead of hijacking this further. ---
**Author:** ![Lucifer12](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/b38774/32.png) [@Lucifer12](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lucifer12)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2001, 5:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-of-these-classic-books-should-i-read-first/79065/29 "2001-08-31T17:45:36Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Dinsdale \* > \*\*Jim Harrison. Mmmm. > I’d really love to run into him in a dive on one of my may trips up to Michigan. > > A Good Day to Die > Sun Dog > Legends > > On another tack, was there ever a movie that had less to do with the book than Wolf? I’ll toss this up as another post instead of hijacking this further. \*\* Oh, I’ll help you hijack it just a tiny bit more. Yeah, Wolf was pretty far from the original stuff. It put me off seeing any more Harrison adaptions including Legends Of The Fall. I loved that book so much I couldn’t bring myself to watch _any_ movie adaption, no matter how good it may be. ---
**Author:** ![Lionors](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/c37758/32.png) [@Lionors](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lionors)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2001, 2:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-of-these-classic-books-should-i-read-first/79065/30 "2001-09-04T14:57:11Z")
What the heck, I’ll throw in an opposing view. Walden first. I liked Thoreau, crusty old coot that he was. I liked Atlas Shrugged. I will say that you can skip Galt’s speech without much problem (if you haven’t figured out his philosophy by then, you never will.) Take a break afterwards and read something totally unrelated and reasonably cheerful afterwards, though. I’ll second gobear’s recommendation on Ulysses. Prepare to go slowly and mull thoroughly. Zen was overrated. It won’t kill you to read it, but I got very little out of it. You can say you’ve read it. Yee-hah. I prefer Faulkner in limited doses. I found his short stories to be a better introduction to his style than his longer work. I personally did not care for The Sound and The Fury (and I’m trying to be polite here). Good luck and enjoy. ---
**Author:** ![CrankyAsAnOldMan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crankyasanoldman/32/11670_2.png) [@CrankyAsAnOldMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CrankyAsAnOldMan)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2001, 3:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-of-these-classic-books-should-i-read-first/79065/31 "2001-09-04T15:43:35Z")
Cranky checks in: Cliffs Notes are not just for desperate high school students trying to get out of reading an assigned book. I suggest that if you find any of these a chore but want to read them anyway, go get a reader’s guide like Cliffs Notes. That’s the only way I could get through Faulkner myself. And it made me better appreciate the books I did like. I tend to miss the significance of all things literary. This is an absurd trait to find in one who reads as much as I do, but I swear symbolism has to hit me over the head before I see it. I also can never remember the historical and cultural events of the time that make certain books so important. That’s why I occasionally indulge in the booklets that guide you through the classics. ---
**Author:** ![Angel\_of\_the\_Lord](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/angel_of_the_lord/32/2949_2.png) [@Angel\_of\_the\_Lord](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Angel_of_the_Lord)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2001, 6:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-of-these-classic-books-should-i-read-first/79065/32 "2001-09-04T18:20:14Z")
…I have to jump in here, if only to further discourage you from reading _Atlas Shrugged_. The book reads like a deranged political tract. It’s good for kindling, and for pressing flowers, though, so you might want to keep it handy for those purposes. If you want to substitute another book, try _Crime and Punishment_. Well worth the read, even though it’s just as opinionated as _Atlas_ Also, a word on Cliff’s Notes. . .those sometimes give interpretations that are considered by the literary establishment (i.e., your teacher) to be incorrect. So, if you read them, you run the risk of looking like an idiot. In some cases, the teacher will be familiar with the Cliff’s Notes’ interpretations, and will know that you haven’t read the book. Just a friendly warning! If you want to continue shirking, I’d advise you to use Bloom’s notes…pretty much anything except Cliff’s should be clean. ---
**Author:** ![Moe](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/moe/32/2972_2.png) [@Moe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Moe)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2001, 9:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-of-these-classic-books-should-i-read-first/79065/33 "2001-09-04T21:42:15Z")
Sheesh! does anyone have anything positive to say about _Atlas Shrugged_?!! Please???!! Lie if you have to! My dad is the biggest _Atlas Shrugged_ fan I know. For years he’s been begging me to read it. “Kenny you have got to read this book… Kenny you must read it… you’ll never read another book like it again… it’s soooo brilliant… I so related to _John Galt_…etc, etc.”. And this goes on nearly everytime I come home “so Kenny, have you had a chance to check out _AS_ yet” -“no, haven’t had much time lately Dad” -(dissappointed smirk) “you really should read it”. It’s really too damn big a book to read simply to appease someone. And with all the AS bashing here, and from posters whose opinions I respect, I think I’d rather be massaged with a salted cheese grater while nursing the flu than read it. Oh horrible existence, why do you mock me so? Anyway, as to the OP, I think _Crime and Punishment_ is a must read for all, though _Notes from the Underground_ is also great and a much shorter intro to Dosteyevsky. Certainly put _1984_ high on your list of classics to read. _The Castle_ by Kafka is another great classic, but you may just want to jump out a window when you find out it was never completed. To remedy this, read _The Trial_ instead. Not as good as _The Castle_ IMO but at least it has an ending. ---
**Author:** ![toshirodragon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e68b1a/32.png) [@toshirodragon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/toshirodragon)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2001, 1:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-of-these-classic-books-should-i-read-first/79065/34 "2001-09-05T01:45:02Z")
Personally Occ, I dont care for most of the books on this OP , BUT my feeling is if you are curious about a book TRY IT! Don’t let someone else make the decision for you, your taste may be different than theirs. As you can see there is a wide variety of opinion… dive in and define your own taste! Good Luck and Good Reading! ---
**Author:** ![CrankyAsAnOldMan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crankyasanoldman/32/11670_2.png) [@CrankyAsAnOldMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CrankyAsAnOldMan)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2001, 2:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-of-these-classic-books-should-i-read-first/79065/35 "2001-09-05T02:19:07Z")
Moe, _I_ liked Atlas Shrugged. I found it interesting and thought-provoking, although more than a few dead horses were beaten. I find myself increasingly reluctant to admit my enjoyment of it, though. Some people seem to regard liking that book as the hallmark of small-mindedness, and that anyone who digs it and finds it (god forbid) life-changing is revealing that this book is their first encounter with any idea more complex than how a puppet named Bert could really have pet pigeons. Not that I feel that way, but people have said as much in other threads. ---
**Author:** ![dropzone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dropzone/32/7515_2.png) [@dropzone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dropzone)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2001, 2:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-of-these-classic-books-should-i-read-first/79065/36 "2001-09-05T02:50:47Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Moe \* > \*\*1. Sheesh! does anyone have anything positive to say about _Atlas Shrugged_?!! Please???!! Lie if you have to! > > 1. _The Castle_ by Kafka is another great classic, but you may just want to jump out a window when you find out it was never completed.\*\* Another English major (for about two semesters) checking in. 1. Ignore the crap in the OP. Uniformly over-rated and self-indulgent. _Dubliners_ is more accessible and enjoyable Joyce. _Portrait_ is better Joyce. The same roles are taken by _The Rievers_ and _Light in August_ for Faulkner. Emerson is better Thoreau. 2. No. Positively insufferable and I read it when I was in high school and pretty insufferable and easily led. I should have been prime Rand material. I wasn’t. 3. How can you tell? 😉 OTOH, am I the only person who finds Kafka purposely funny? ---
**Author:** ![Dangerosa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/22d042/32.png) [@Dangerosa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dangerosa)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2001, 3:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-of-these-classic-books-should-i-read-first/79065/37 "2001-09-05T03:25:08Z")
I’m going to second Cranky’s recommendation for Cliff’s Notes - particullarly for something like Ulysses. I didn’t use them at all in college, but have gotten them since college for some of the stuff my book club has gone through - Le Mort de Arthur (impossible, even with the Cliff Notes), Les Miserables (the Cliff Notes told you exactly which 200 pages sequences you could skip completely), Middlemarch. If you have trouble finishing books, I’d hold off on several of these and read the “readable” classics first. Nothing by Rand is readable, nor is Ulysses (although Joyce’s short stories are), but, as with all literature YMMV. ---
**Author:** ![Lionors](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/c37758/32.png) [@Lionors](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lionors)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2001, 6:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-of-these-classic-books-should-i-read-first/79065/38 "2001-09-08T18:07:34Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by CrankyAsAnOldMan \* > \*\*Moe, _I_ liked Atlas Shrugged. I found it interesting and thought-provoking, although more than a few dead horses were beaten. > > I find myself increasingly reluctant to admit my enjoyment of it, though. Some people seem to regard liking that book as the hallmark of small-mindedness, and that anyone who digs it and finds it (god forbid) life-changing is revealing that this book is their first encounter with any idea more complex than how a puppet named Bert could really have pet pigeons. > > Not that I feel that way, but people have said as much in other threads. \*\* Hey, Cranky, I’ll stand with you. Given the comments on this thread, I pulled my copy of Atlas Shrugged out and re-read it this week (it had been some years since I’d done so.) Guess what? I still liked the concepts, still liked the underlying messages and I still liked the character of Dagny. Do I think Rand could have eased up on some of her points? Probably. I didn’t think Galt’s speech was terribly necessary to the book, as I mentioned before. It isn’t an easy read in parts, but the underlying concepts are ones I tend to agree with. Logic over emotionalism. Independence named as one of the highest virtues. That there is a difference between living and just existing, and one should never settle for the latter. That you should think for yourself, and never let someone else do the thinking for you. That sex does not limit intelligence, nor what is within your grasp to achieve, but certain elements of society can and will attempt to place such limits on you. Given that these were all tenets I agreed with (and still do), I liked Atlas Shrugged. Yet another reason I think it hit me hard when I first read it (13 or 14, I believe) was that it was one of the first ‘literature’ books I read where the main character was not only a woman, but an intelligent woman of strong character and beliefs, in a non-traditional role, who was unashamed to be what she was and unashamed to want what she did. Most of the other recommended classics I’d read up to that point featured women not at all or at best, dependent helpmates. (Conrad’s Heart of Darkness being a prime example.) That being said, it’s no wonder this one appealed to me. Given when Rand was writing, Dagny’s portrayal was more than a little unusual to see also. As far as anti-Randers go --well, if we all liked the same thing, the book market would crash and a whole lot of people would be out of business. So long as we all don’t go around slaughtering each other’s sacred cows, we get along just fine. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Tuckerfan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/eada6e/32.png) [@Tuckerfan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tuckerfan)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2001, 7:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-of-these-classic-books-should-i-read-first/79065/39 "2001-09-08T19:10:24Z")
Skip the Faulkner. As an English major I was forced to read much of his writings and found 90% of it to be heavy handed tripe. (Though I will say that the last chapter of _Light in August_ was great.) I could never make it through anything by Ayn Rand. _Zen_ is a light read, but not horrible. _Walden_ seemed to be slow and I couldn’t make it through it. As for the Joyce, I’d tackle the other books by him that have been suggested before I went for _Ulysses_. Finally, you might try reading _Naked Lunch_ by William S. Burroughs. His style’s a little hard to get a handle on at first (it helps if you’ve read Joyce’s works before), but there’s a little something in there for everyone. ---
**Author:** ![Derleth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Derleth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Derleth)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2001, 10:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-of-these-classic-books-should-i-read-first/79065/40 "2001-09-08T22:34:12Z")
Ayn Rand was not a fiction writer. She was a political philospher who happened to write bad fiction. If you want to understand Rand, and I think everyone should have a basic grasp of her philosophy, read some of her essays. No predictable plots, no cardboard characters, no reprehensible styles. Case in point: I read **Anthem** a while back. I kept wating for it to get good, and it really never did. It dragged on for too long, and then stopped with a predictable ending. Not enjoyable at all. The style was reminiscent of a high schooler’s first attempt at ‘creative writing’, the plot could have been thought up by a committee of movie execs, and the characters displayed little by way of depth. Then I read _The Virtue of Being Selfish_, a collection of essays by her and her contemporaries. And I loved it. That work spoke to philosophies I had been creating on my own, and gave me new concepts to think about. My estimation of Rand jumped. Why she ever wrote fiction is beyond me, but her essays deserve to be read. Looking down, I see **Lionors** has preceeded me, but with something positive to say about her fiction. Maybe **Anthem** just wasn’t her best work. But I got a lot more out of her essays than I ever did out of her fiction. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-of-these-classic-books-should-i-read-first/79065.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-of-these-classic-books-should-i-read-first/79065.md?page=3)