Basic culture Options

[Gaudeamus]

There are some books most people will probably agree are basic reading if you want to call yourself educated; and some other books would have to be read if you want to call yourself a real person of culture who knows what's of interest to humanity. Let's not go into religious scripture works, which are another category (or we might just agree that the Holy Scripture of the basic world religions are a part of the latter category anyway, or you might consider that your particular religion's Holy Scripture is the only worthy one).

To take an example: some people might include James Joyce's "Ulysses" in their list. I would not (I didn't read it, BTW - I only know it from its reputation). I don't consider it "basic culture"; it's more something for the really literate and for those for who literature gives them almost everything they want to get out of life, and maybe (in some small way) it is something which gives you status.

But I would - for starters - include a number of biographies, and autobiographies : Gandhi, Casanova, Leibniz... the like. Some highly controversial ones might even have to be included, for culture's and knowledge's sakes.

I would also include the old classics such as Homer, Vergil, Plato, Cicero.... you'd have to restrain your choice to the essentials as there are so many, and it wouldn't be easy. Not to mention mythologies of all kinds, and some very old works which you will certainly find in sacred-texts.com, such as the Vedas and assorted works.

Some works, fundamental to an understanding of human history: the original books about the discovery and conquest of America would be an example. Basically, also books which provide a real understanding of humanity's different cultures.

What would you include in this list ? Do you have any particular titles in mind, or do you disagree with some of my choices ?

[Aranesque]

I would include Ulysses. Proust too.

It all depends on just what sort of culture one basically desires to see realised.

[Kalisurfer]

I don’t think that any one set of books makes one educated or a person of culture who knows what is of interest to humanity. It’s more a state of mind, a quest for knowledge while being inquisitive and curious to what is considered great writings in history, keeping an open mind and willing to suspend inherent belief systems while taking in new information, exploring new writers and ideas that are contemporary and outside the judgment of history as of yet. The books you mention are great starters Gaudamus, even “Ulysses” in my opinion. Books on history, logic, philosophy, religion, science, mathematics, biography, art, culture and creative expressive books in prose, poetry and finally in the form of novels, (Not to mention any categories that I forgot to mention.) are all the types of books I would put on that gigantic list if I were to attempt such a thing.

A list of what is considered good or required literature is probably very debatable, where no two people will agree totally on where the list should start or stop. Even great writers cast doubt upon the worth of other great writers, for Tolstoy considered the writings of Shakespeare as being completely worthless.

Fostering an appreciation for books and the art of reading is more important than just what books are read in my opinion, for most educational systems cover the classics and basic informational books on history, science, art and world literature. Once the value and love of reading is imbibed into a person, than the journey of discovering new writers and topics will naturally evolve over a lifetime, usually according to the likes and interest of the reader and their self discovery, making the person that much more learned in the way of the world and various differences that exist within it all.

[Gerard]

(note: Kalisurfer and I were writing our posts at the same time)


When I think of being cultured I think of spreading loving kindness to one and all for instance. Helping somebody when you can. My parents thought that eating with fork in left hand and knife in right hand, knowing how to tie your tie, keeping my trap shut at a concert and knowing how to order in French was being cultured. It might vary with the culture you're living in.

Being culture-bound also applies to books. I agree with Joyce and Proust and Homer (+ Ovid's Metamorphoses), but you can't get around Shakespeare. And I think I learned most from P.G. Wodehouse (yannehâsti na tadkvacit "what is not here is nowhere else") and James Thurber. But in the Netherlands must-reads are Vondel, Dèr Mouw, J.H. Leopold, Couperus, Komrij, Mulish, Eva Gerlach, Maarten Toonder, etc.

You are not educated or cultured if you don't know cultures other than the Anglo-Saxon one: Cervantes, Dostojevski, Jorge Luis Borges, Garcia Marquez, Fernando Pessoa, Kavafis, Kafka, Wislawa Szymborska; Wolfram von Eschenbach's Parzival, Goethe's Faust, Nietzsche, Rilke, Thomas Mann's Magic Mountain, Dante's Divina Commedia, Gilgamesh Epic, the Edda, the Genji Monogatari, the Kalevala.

Back to English: Beowulf, John Donne, Thoreau, Emerson, Blake, Dylan Thomas, T.S. Eliot, Conan Dyle and Lewis Carroll.

[babu]

Samuel Clemens or when he later took spiritual initiation, Mark Twain.

[sekhmetsat]

If we are talking understanding other cultures, I would say a good place to start is their fairy or folk tales and songs. You can learn a lot from them.

[Aranesque]

With the possible exception of Conan Doyle (!) an excellent list, Gerard.

I agree fullheartedly with you regarding the instructive importance of Wodehouse and Thurber.

Sadly, I notice that Burns has yet to be mentioned - indespensible (in my opinion).

[Gaudeamus]

I would include Ulysses. Proust too.

It all depends on just what sort of culture one basically desires to see realised.

Your time is limited. You can't spend your whole life reading books.
You have to make choices, reject some things.

[Gaudeamus]

If we are talking understanding other cultures, I would say a good place to start is their fairy or folk tales and songs. You can learn a lot from them.

This is certainly true, but understanding other cultures would just be a part of "being cultured", though an important one. Folk tales and myths and old songs are all very instructive for understanding their cultures. Being cultured would imply, not only understanding other cultures, but also humanity itself in all its fundamental expressions : religion, science, art.... and at the same time having a good scientific background enabling you to understanding the world of matter in which we live.

[Gaudeamus]

(note: Kalisurfer and I were writing our posts at the same time)


When I think of being cultured I think of spreading loving kindness to one and all for instance. Helping somebody when you can. My parents thought that eating with fork in left hand and knife in right hand, knowing how to tie your tie, keeping my trap shut at a concert and knowing how to order in French was being cultured. It might vary with the culture you're living in.

This is certainly true. If you are a nomad in Somalia, you don't really need how to tie your tie or order in French ! Being cultured is something else.

Being culture-bound also applies to books. I agree with Joyce and Proust and Homer (+ Ovid's Metamorphoses), but you can't get around Shakespeare. And I think I learned most from P.G. Wodehouse (yannehâsti na tadkvacit "what is not here is nowhere else") and James Thurber. But in the Netherlands must-reads are Vondel, Dèr Mouw, J.H. Leopold, Couperus, Komrij, Mulish, Eva Gerlach, Maarten Toonder, etc.

You can't put Joyce or Proust on the same level with Homer or Ovid. Those two are kind of immortal and transcend culture, which IMHO is not true for Joyce or Proust, as great and famous as they may be. Some of the Dutch authors you are mentioning seem a matter of taste to me. Vondel, yes (why not Erasmus ?), but most of those others might, compared with what else is on the list, be mere waste of time.

You are not educated or cultured if you don't know cultures other than the Anglo-Saxon one: Cervantes, Dostojevski, Jorge Luis Borges, Garcia Marquez, Fernando Pessoa, Kavafis, Kafka, Wislawa Szymborska; Wolfram von Eschenbach's Parzival, Goethe's Faust, Nietzsche, Rilke, Thomas Mann's Magic Mountain, Dante's Divina Commedia, Gilgamesh Epic, the Edda, the Genji Monogatari, the Kalevala.

Again, some I would consider more important than others. Gilgamesh Epic, Edda, Kalevala : timeless, and priceless works as they come out of the mists of time and deal with the origins of humanity itself, while the Genji Monogatari while a great literary work, and probably important for understanding Japanese culture, is only the work of one particular writer. Parzival, Faust, Divina Commedia : very great works. For understanding the historical impact of the discovery of the American continent on European cultures I would include the works and testimonies of Bernal Diaz (companion of Cortes), bishop Diego de Landa and others. I would also include works by that great explorer, Richard Burton, such as the Tales of 1001 Nights (unexpurgated version, not the children's version). Marco Polo's story of his travel to China.

Back to English: Beowulf, John Donne, Thoreau, Emerson, Blake, Dylan Thomas, T.S. Eliot, Conan Dyle and Lewis Carroll.

Blake, painter and mystic who knew both Bible and Koran, and as I seem to remember spoke several languages, would be important too.

[Kalisurfer]

I would include Ulysses. Proust too.

It all depends on just what sort of culture one basically desires to see realised.

Your time is limited. You can't spend your whole life reading books.
You have to make choices, reject some things.

Which is why some of us choose to read James Joyce's "Ulysses" and Proust also with the limited time we have. I have a hard time seeing some type of agreed upon list of must read books versus books that do not have to be read, it just smacks of personal judgements made into a universal law for all. Most classics will be read by people who get an Western education at some point in their lives, and these books are to be honored and read for whatever their contribution has been to our culture and humanity at large. No doubt certain books have more of a chance of appearing in must read books list if a poll were taken across a cross section of humanity, but a lot of these must read books highly depend on the beliefs and values of an individual who makes such a list, and some books may just reflect the cultural biases of one culture over another due to it being in economic/military power longer than others, or at some point in history it conquered other cultures whose books and ideas have been destroyed, lost or marginalized. I dislike seeing books being put into a category of being unimportant or not needed for the good of humanity in some way due to the fact that we cannot read all the books due to the limited time we have on the planet, though that is a fact and one in which makes our choices that much more special. Nothing wrong in reading lesser known or newer authors who are not on any best of all time lists, nor books that provide a reader with joy, happiness, intrigue and intellectual stimulus, be it a romantic or suspense novel, comic book, graphic novel, travelogue, cookbook, memoir or some other category that may indeed inform and enlighten one personally, though not a classic that will stand the test of time or be put on any all time, must read great literature list.

I do enjoy reading what people do consider must reading, or important books in their life, for it says a lot about the person and no list is right or wrong in my estimation, plus it is fun to see how much you have in common with others, not to mention differences too, plus we get to learn of important books that may not be on our reading radar.

[Gerard]

Some of the Dutch authors you are mentioning seem a matter of taste to me. Vondel, yes (why not Erasmus ?), but most of those others might, compared with what else is on the list, be mere waste of time.

Sorry, dat ik Erasmus vergeten ben, zo weet ik er nog wel een paar. Ik heb het zelf nooit een tijdverspilling gevonden om grote dichters als Dèr Mouw, Leopold of Gerlach te lezen. Ik vraag me af hoe jij kan bepalen wanneer iemand z'n tijd aan het verspillen is, het lijkt wel of jij de mensen de wet wil voorschrijven in plaats van een discussie over cultuur of beschaving te voeren.

[Kalisurfer]

Ahh Gerard, taal en cultuur, de definitieve grens van communicatie ... dit is geweldig!

[Gerard]

Ahh Gerard, taal en cultuur, de definitieve grens van communicatie ... dit is geweldig!

Dank je. Ik denk wel dat we de grens bereikt hebben (I think we reached the limit, or something broke down).

[Aranesque]

Some of the Dutch authors you are mentioning seem a matter of taste to me. Vondel, yes (why not Erasmus ?), but most of those others might, compared with what else is on the list, be mere waste of time.

Sorry, dat ik Erasmus vergeten ben, zo weet ik er nog wel een paar. Ik heb het zelf nooit een tijdverspilling gevonden om grote dichters als Dèr Mouw, Leopold of Gerlach te lezen. Ik vraag me af hoe jij kan bepalen wanneer iemand z'n tijd aan het verspillen is, het lijkt wel of jij de mensen de wet wil voorschrijven in plaats van een discussie over cultuur of beschaving te voeren.

When it comes to taste or - dare I be romantic about it - what makes one live, there is no set 'law'...

One person may be excited by Homer. Another - such as myself - may find him, on the whole, to be rather tedious. Especially The Odyssey (I speak as someone who has actually read him).

Gaudemus, the sentiments expresssed by Joyce in Ulysses (you should read it sometime) and Proust in À La Recherche Du Temps Perdu are every bit as universal as anything penned by the Greeks.

[Gaudeamus]

Some of the Dutch authors you are mentioning seem a matter of taste to me. Vondel, yes (why not Erasmus ?), but most of those others might, compared with what else is on the list, be mere waste of time.

Sorry, dat ik Erasmus vergeten ben, zo weet ik er nog wel een paar. Ik heb het zelf nooit een tijdverspilling gevonden om grote dichters als Dèr Mouw, Leopold of Gerlach te lezen. Ik vraag me af hoe jij kan bepalen wanneer iemand z'n tijd aan het verspillen is, het lijkt wel of jij de mensen de wet wil voorschrijven in plaats van een discussie over cultuur of beschaving te voeren.

I will translate Gerard's reply into English so other readers will be able to understand. It doesn't make sense to post in a language which is probably not understood by the majority of visitors in this forum.

"Sorry I forgot about Erasmus, there are others like this I could mention. As for me, I never felt reading great poets such as Dèr Mouw, Leopold or Gerlach is a waste of time. I wonder how you are able to determine when someone is wasting his time, it looks like you want to dictate people what they have to do instead of having a discussion about culture or civilization."

So it looks like I have struck a nerve with Gerard. That's too bad, but I did expect other opinions, not such a reaction. The idea was to present *my* opinion, that's all it is, I am not determining anything. when I wrote "might be a waste of time" (I was being cautious, I did not write "IS a waste of time", and above that I added "compared to those others"), that's just what my opinion is, and I think I should be free to express it without having to fear being reprimanded for expressing it. Gerard, you could have used your freedom to express another opinion, there was no need to get on your high horse. I understand you appreciate these three authors, but I never heard of them, and I am still let's say, prejudiced in the sense that I think there are other authors which seem to me more important as far as someone's level of culture is concerned. You know as well as I do that "Lof der Zotheid" by Erasmus is world literature, even if it was written in a minor language such as Dutch.

[Gaudeamus]

Some of the Dutch authors you are mentioning seem a matter of taste to me. Vondel, yes (why not Erasmus ?), but most of those others might, compared with what else is on the list, be mere waste of time.

Sorry, dat ik Erasmus vergeten ben, zo weet ik er nog wel een paar. Ik heb het zelf nooit een tijdverspilling gevonden om grote dichters als Dèr Mouw, Leopold of Gerlach te lezen. Ik vraag me af hoe jij kan bepalen wanneer iemand z'n tijd aan het verspillen is, het lijkt wel of jij de mensen de wet wil voorschrijven in plaats van een discussie over cultuur of beschaving te voeren.

When it comes to taste or - dare I be romantic about it - what makes one live, there is no set 'law'...

One person may be excited by Homer. Another - such as myself - may find him, on the whole, to be rather tedious. Especially The Odyssey (I speak as someone who has actually read him).

Gaudemus, the sentiments expresssed by Joyce in Ulysses (you should read it sometime) and Proust in À La Recherche Du Temps Perdu are every bit as universal as anything penned by the Greeks.

Agreed, when it comes to taste.... but that's exactly the question: is it just a matter of taste or are we, in fact, trying to apply some kind of objective criteria ? If you find Homer tedious, that's taste. Following objective criteria it is difficult to ignore him without as a result being notably less "cultured" than you would have been, and certainly less rich in world culture. If I may ask you: how long did it take you to read the Odyssey, Aran ?

I never read Joyce or Proust, you can be absolutely right. Yet, it's funny but that tediousness I associate particularly with Joyce's Ulysses. And would you call Proust as representative for French, or European-western culture as Homer is for the classic culture ? Would you say Proust is as immortal as Homer is ?

[Gaudeamus]

Maybe I should also again put the emphasis on "basic". Basic culture, basic reading.
If you stick to what's basic (which I myself lost out of my sight during this discussion), it will resolve some difficult problems of choice, I guess.

[Gerard]

Some of the Dutch authors you are mentioning seem a matter of taste to me. Vondel, yes (why not Erasmus ?), but most of those others might, compared with what else is on the list, be mere waste of time.

Sorry, dat ik Erasmus vergeten ben, zo weet ik er nog wel een paar. Ik heb het zelf nooit een tijdverspilling gevonden om grote dichters als Dèr Mouw, Leopold of Gerlach te lezen. Ik vraag me af hoe jij kan bepalen wanneer iemand z'n tijd aan het verspillen is, het lijkt wel of jij de mensen de wet wil voorschrijven in plaats van een discussie over cultuur of beschaving te voeren.

I will translate Gerard's reply into English so other readers will be able to understand. It doesn't make sense to post in a language which is probably not understood by the majority of visitors in this forum.

"Sorry I forgot about Erasmus, there are others like this I could mention. As for me, I never felt reading great poets such as Dèr Mouw, Leopold or Gerlach is a waste of time. I wonder how you are able to determine when someone is wasting his time, it looks like you want to dictate people what they have to do instead of having a discussion about culture or civilization."

So it looks like I have struck a nerve with Gerard. That's too bad, but I did expect other opinions, not such a reaction. The idea was to present *my* opinion, that's all it is, I am not determining anything. when I wrote "might be a waste of time" (I was being cautious, I did not write "IS a waste of time", and above that I added "compared to those others"), that's just what my opinion is, and I think I should be free to express it without having to fear being reprimanded for expressing it. Gerard, you could have used your freedom to express another opinion, there was no need to get on your high horse. I understand you appreciate these three authors, but I never heard of them, and I am still let's say, prejudiced in the sense that I think there are other authors which seem to me more important as far as someone's level of culture is concerned. You know as well as I do that "Lof der Zotheid" by Erasmus is world literature, even if it was written in a minor language such as Dutch.

I agree that I could have mentioned "In Praise of Folly" or Multatuli's "Max Havelaar" or Salinger, I just slammed together a list of a few authors and works in that post. (I'm sorry to hear that you don't know J.R. dèr Mouw, especially his "'K ben Brahman, maar we zitten zonder meid". Maybe as a real HK you were scared off by his nom-de-plume Adwaita?)

I did try to stick to "basics", I read most of the works and authors I mentioned in High School and College.

[Aranesque]

When it comes to taste or - dare I be romantic about it - what makes one live, there is no set 'law'...

One person may be excited by Homer. Another - such as myself - may find him, on the whole, to be rather tedious. Especially The Odyssey (I speak as someone who has actually read him).

Gaudemus, the sentiments expresssed by Joyce in Ulysses (you should read it sometime) and Proust in À La Recherche Du Temps Perdu are every bit as universal as anything penned by the Greeks.

Agreed, when it comes to taste.... but that's exactly the question: is it just a matter of taste or are we, in fact, trying to apply some kind of objective criteria ?

Again, speaking personally (I've never quite mastered how to speak otherwise), I'd say 'taste', or better still, nourishment...

If I may ask you: how long did it take you to read the Odyssey, Aran ?

I honestly do not recall when (at least a decade) or how long it took (did I even finish it? - thus the employment of 'tedious') - those books form part of our library, and have been dragged with us as we've moved hither and thither...

Our eldest son was at one time (from about the age of eight to his mid-teens) very keen on Homer, and would, at times, drive us to distraction by his almost constant retelling of tales from The Odyssey ...

I never read Joyce or Proust, you can be absolutely right. Yet, it's funny but that tediousness I associate particularly with Joyce's Ulysses. And would you call Proust as representative for French, or European-western culture as Homer is for the classic culture ? Would you say Proust is as immortal as Homer is ?

Frankly - at the risk of sounding somewhat rude, and (heavens above) uncultured - I don't much care for the Western classical world. For the most part it fails to move me. So, for this old fellow at least, Proust and Joyce are certainly more significant figures.

As to the question of their 'immortality' - let's give it some time: Ask me again in about three thousand years...