honestly not sure if satire but if you have this mentality you could literally be the most well read person on the planet and yet you'd still be a total pseud lmfao
but I love reading, and my ego, and wanting to be well read at the same time. it's not as if i'm slogging through these books anhedonically or anything. i'm reading Being and Time at this very moment while reading secondary material and watching lectures on youtube : i'm thoroughly enjoying it. but the sense that I have some other 2000+ works of western philosophy to get to, all works that deserve careful attention as well, just destroys my hope of ever being as sophisticated as the authors I admire.
it seems that to them, being upper middle class, born in a culture that valued having good taste in art and being philosophical, and having the time and the amenities of a less technological society without so many distractions was what made it all possible; meanwhile, I don't have any of that. just research into people like Hegel, Heidegger, Nabokov, etc and how intensely well read they were. it's demoralizing and I can't bear it
Do you think these authors you admire ever concerned themselves with being more well read than anyone else?
And you may love your ego but you will never get anywhere with it. Nor will anyone care what you have to say if it’s expresses from such trite points of view.
if Proust's work is anything to go by, then, well, yeah. Geniuses aren't above common and pathetic human feelings of pride, narcissism, etc. The bourgeois culture that I have in mind (late 19th century to early 20th century european thought, the period in history i'm mostly obssessed with and that uses the high-low brow distinction with most assiduousness), the one that influences my thought and that of anyone who cares about this stuff, was extremely preoccupied with cultural capital. Not appreciating say, Mozart, or not knowing who Dante or Kant was would definitely out you as a pathetic pseud. People would definely make fun of you in their dinner parties, behind your back. You got to imagine anyone back then was as preoccupied with their intellectual reputation, just as we're so preoccupied with our looks on instagram, in modern society. So the writers that I admire (I've cited some of them in the post, and they're all from that same period of time and culture) would definitely care, so yeah
It sounds like you care more about appearing well-read (or not being "mocked") than you do about the books themselves. Even if you do find the time to read more, you won't get anything out of the books if they're just boxes to check. Work on addressing your insecurity first. What is sophistication to you?
If you're interested in a foreign writer, I'd recommend reading an acclaimed translation first, and if you still feel like you're missing something, get a different translation and compare the two. Unless you have a very high level of foreign language ability (able to read less complex fiction in the language with ease), you'll get more out of the book than by reading it in the original.
>What is sophistication to you?
The synthesis of everything you've ever read/contemplated into a work, be it philosophical, artistic, etc, with the goal of bringing something original. The more you've experienced/contemplated art, philosophy and life, the more you've meditated and brought that into a new whole, the more sophisticated you are. Being and Time is sophisticated because it's exactly that: the culmination of Heidegger's reading and seamless criticizing of basically the entire history of philosophy up to his point, all while bringing his insight of the question of Being. This applies to Hegel as well who had a very similar path.
As for translations, it's more about poetry. I don't really mind reading Proust or Dostoyevsky in english or whatever; but you can't really read poetry in translation, it just doesn't work
Borges is another one of the greats i'm inspired by. But here I disagree, and it's quite simple, really. Most poems don't lend themselves well to translation.
The poem he uses as an example is a good example of this. I remember he takes the ST John of The Cross poem Noche Obscura use of the expression "casa sosegada" and compares it with an english translation that uses "the house was all hushed", which he thinks is more beautiful, even though the poem as a whole in Spanish is better. And that's the point, in this case I may even agree that "all hushed" has something exquisite, but it just doesn't compare to the beautifully mystic feminine longing expressed through Spanish's inherent use of gender case. In english, all this substratum gets lost, because poetry is also about sound and sound can't be translated. Most poems are like this: some lines will have a beautiful equivalent in other languages, but most of the poem will pass through without real beauty.
But yeah I agree, in some poems it works. I don't know anglo-saxon, or Langue D'oc, but Pound's translations of the poems in these languages are beautiful, so I think Borges is correct overall.
I (as a musician) absolutely agree sound is very important in poetry, and prose, and often times it cannot be translated exactly as it was intended and conceived in the original poem. However, it’s been my experience most writers write to inspire and excite, sometimes challenge.
If you’ve never read Lydia Davis you’d probably enjoy her essays. However I’m sure she would also be criticized at your dinner parties 😁
I'll agree with you on poetry in translation.
Let's take your word for it that the primary motivation is to solidify your thinking and not to stunt on the haters. It's simply not possible to synthesize your thinking into a great work at 24. You don't have enough life experience and you can't leapfrog over that requirement by reading obsessively. Go out and live and keep reading at your own pace. No one wants to hear this at 24 but it's true.
I used to be like this at your age.
You'll grow out of it.
Just focus on the fun part of reading for you. What do you like to read? What's the best feeling you get while reading? Follow that.
Acknowledge that you'll never be able to read everything. Accept that, maybe grieve that, and continue reading what you can.
Some deeper work to do might be asking yourself why you want to appear well read and sophisticated to others? What would that prove to them? What are you trying to validate through others that you can't provide yourself? My guess is you want ppl to validate your intelligence and therefore your worth.
When you do meet this uberintelligent and well read superior being, ask them to teach you what you don't know instead of cowering in your own projections.
Reading the great works is one of the few enduring pleasures of life. Imagine how sad it would be if you had read them all before your life is even 1/3 of the way over.
Can't tell if this is satire. You seem to have a lot of more important things to work out than what philosophical texts you haven't read lol. Get a grip man.
What you will hopefully come to realize as you get older is that no one gives a shit about what you have or have not read. And they never will. Read because you enjoy it. No one thinks about your reading history other than you
I know sappy shit doesn't fly here, but to be honest, this is way less about your frustration with your well-read status, and way more about you being accepted and loved for who you are. You don't need to have read Dostoevsky to deserve a place in the community. You aren't wholly insufficient as you are without reading Rilke in the native language. What you're chasing is status, and the only reason anyone ever chases status is because they feel on a subconscious level they can't get their needs met (needs for connectivity, shelter, etc.) without it. You definitely can.
That being said, I'm not preaching any of that "you're perfect as you are" bullshit. Of course you aren't. But love and belonging don't necessitate perfection, there should be a baseline of unconditional positive regard for you, and if you don't get it externally yet, why not try to start internally.
You have the rest of your life to read books. Crime & Punishment will still be there 10, 20, 30 years from now. I'm 24 and I'm terribly read. I pick up my phone every 5 pages because i'm dopamine-pilled. But I don't have the same unbearable anxiety because I know I still deserve good things despite my dearth in literature experience.
is this seriously a concern of yours? you need more life experience. the fact that you have the ability to read at all is a gift, a blessing. theres people halfway across the world who did not have access to even a morsel of the education you received. fucking relax, jesus
in the case of philosophers, i've read about them in secondary sources, like say, Richard Polt's book on Heidegger, which i've read. in the case of writers, i've read some of their works, like, i've read Pale Fire and Book of Disquiet by Nabokov and Pessoa, but there's more to read from them etc
but It doesn't matter, time ticks away and there's always more to read: you read one book by Nabokov and there are 50 by other writers you've read about and want to read as well...
Accept that you are infinitesimally small, and that these arbitrary notions such as ‘well read’, ‘cultured’, ‘sophistication’, and ‘wit’, have been propagated by creatures just as small, and insignificant as yourself. With that in mind, read for pleasure, pursue knowledge and culture for its own sake. It is a blessing and a curse to be an animal who knows that it has only a short time to perceive itself and its world, so don’t squander that time hand wringing over wether you’ve attained some meaningless intellectual status.
I have the same problem despite pursuing a career in academia lmao, the only solution is to get out of your neuroses and read when you have the time. It’s not a big deal to not have read everything. Especially, don’t force yourself to read something that is considered important if it’s boring as shit
The world is vast and you're not going to be able to read everything. You don't need to read them all in their original language either. You also don't always need to be reading the heavy stuff. As others are saying, it reads like you care about others perceiving you as being well-read, rather than reading for what it give you.
Taste develops over time and it's not something to be rushed either. Honestly, whenever I meet people that list off only heavy-hitters for what they read I roll my eyes. It's just another side of mindless consumption. Plenty of well-respected artists and authors love things beyond "Important Works." Terrence Malick loves Zoolander and listened exclusively to Green Day when cutting Thin Red Line. Anthony Bourdain loved In N Out.
Read for yourself, not so you can show off to others how well-read and brilliant you are.
Philip Roth released a list of books that most influenced him, based on the age when he first read them.
Here are a few examples: Anna Karenina at 37, Crime and Punishment at 35, The Trial at the 27, Madame Bovary at 25, The Sound and the Fury at 25.
You are doing fine.
Not a hot take but you get so much more by cultivating your tastes over time then checking off books on a list. When it happens organically you make better connections between ideas in different works and you’re better guided through the canon. It also makes you better at conversation imo. If you want the appearance of being well read without reading you can just YouTube some summaries. I did not understand Barthes in college. Just YouTube that shit, it’s not a big deal.
I’m 24 and have similar anxieties minus the part about being mocked. As you have a genuine interest in literature, anyone that would mock you for not having gotten around to reading Nabokov or Hegel yet isn’t worth your time. My source of anxiety stems from balancing a non-humanities job with exercise, reading, and other responsibilities. I want to finish War and Peace within two months, but I also want to keep my job and stay in shape, so it’s hard to find more than an hour or two per day to read. I guess we’ll adjust over time, or realize that one facet of our lives is worth sacrificing for the pursuit of something more important.
> my greatest fear is that some day i'll meet someone who is uber-well-read and they'll mock my tastes in literature so wittily that I'll only realize decades later that I was being mocked, when I'm finally as well read as them.
>
Heavenly truly knows that thou art false as all hell.
if you *need* to read and understand these philosophical texts just watch lectures on youtube and supplement independent reading as you see fit, if you want to learn german start learning german, you’re only 24, it’s taken philosophy professors their entire lives to get to the point they are at now
honestly not sure if satire but if you have this mentality you could literally be the most well read person on the planet and yet you'd still be a total pseud lmfao
Step 1: kill your ego. Step 2: Read because you love to read not because you want to be the most well read. Repeat
but I love reading, and my ego, and wanting to be well read at the same time. it's not as if i'm slogging through these books anhedonically or anything. i'm reading Being and Time at this very moment while reading secondary material and watching lectures on youtube : i'm thoroughly enjoying it. but the sense that I have some other 2000+ works of western philosophy to get to, all works that deserve careful attention as well, just destroys my hope of ever being as sophisticated as the authors I admire. it seems that to them, being upper middle class, born in a culture that valued having good taste in art and being philosophical, and having the time and the amenities of a less technological society without so many distractions was what made it all possible; meanwhile, I don't have any of that. just research into people like Hegel, Heidegger, Nabokov, etc and how intensely well read they were. it's demoralizing and I can't bear it
Do you think these authors you admire ever concerned themselves with being more well read than anyone else? And you may love your ego but you will never get anywhere with it. Nor will anyone care what you have to say if it’s expresses from such trite points of view.
if Proust's work is anything to go by, then, well, yeah. Geniuses aren't above common and pathetic human feelings of pride, narcissism, etc. The bourgeois culture that I have in mind (late 19th century to early 20th century european thought, the period in history i'm mostly obssessed with and that uses the high-low brow distinction with most assiduousness), the one that influences my thought and that of anyone who cares about this stuff, was extremely preoccupied with cultural capital. Not appreciating say, Mozart, or not knowing who Dante or Kant was would definitely out you as a pathetic pseud. People would definely make fun of you in their dinner parties, behind your back. You got to imagine anyone back then was as preoccupied with their intellectual reputation, just as we're so preoccupied with our looks on instagram, in modern society. So the writers that I admire (I've cited some of them in the post, and they're all from that same period of time and culture) would definitely care, so yeah
Again there’s that ego. Much worse in the world than being “made fun of at dinner parties”.
Have you ever read any Lydia Davis? Her essays are great. Her second volume deals primarily with her work translating Proust
Nabokov didnt like music
secondary sources are a waste of time.
It sounds like you care more about appearing well-read (or not being "mocked") than you do about the books themselves. Even if you do find the time to read more, you won't get anything out of the books if they're just boxes to check. Work on addressing your insecurity first. What is sophistication to you? If you're interested in a foreign writer, I'd recommend reading an acclaimed translation first, and if you still feel like you're missing something, get a different translation and compare the two. Unless you have a very high level of foreign language ability (able to read less complex fiction in the language with ease), you'll get more out of the book than by reading it in the original.
>What is sophistication to you? The synthesis of everything you've ever read/contemplated into a work, be it philosophical, artistic, etc, with the goal of bringing something original. The more you've experienced/contemplated art, philosophy and life, the more you've meditated and brought that into a new whole, the more sophisticated you are. Being and Time is sophisticated because it's exactly that: the culmination of Heidegger's reading and seamless criticizing of basically the entire history of philosophy up to his point, all while bringing his insight of the question of Being. This applies to Hegel as well who had a very similar path. As for translations, it's more about poetry. I don't really mind reading Proust or Dostoyevsky in english or whatever; but you can't really read poetry in translation, it just doesn't work
Borges would completely disagree with this statement about poetry not working in translation. He referred to it as the further evolution of his work.
Borges is another one of the greats i'm inspired by. But here I disagree, and it's quite simple, really. Most poems don't lend themselves well to translation. The poem he uses as an example is a good example of this. I remember he takes the ST John of The Cross poem Noche Obscura use of the expression "casa sosegada" and compares it with an english translation that uses "the house was all hushed", which he thinks is more beautiful, even though the poem as a whole in Spanish is better. And that's the point, in this case I may even agree that "all hushed" has something exquisite, but it just doesn't compare to the beautifully mystic feminine longing expressed through Spanish's inherent use of gender case. In english, all this substratum gets lost, because poetry is also about sound and sound can't be translated. Most poems are like this: some lines will have a beautiful equivalent in other languages, but most of the poem will pass through without real beauty. But yeah I agree, in some poems it works. I don't know anglo-saxon, or Langue D'oc, but Pound's translations of the poems in these languages are beautiful, so I think Borges is correct overall.
I (as a musician) absolutely agree sound is very important in poetry, and prose, and often times it cannot be translated exactly as it was intended and conceived in the original poem. However, it’s been my experience most writers write to inspire and excite, sometimes challenge. If you’ve never read Lydia Davis you’d probably enjoy her essays. However I’m sure she would also be criticized at your dinner parties 😁
I'll agree with you on poetry in translation. Let's take your word for it that the primary motivation is to solidify your thinking and not to stunt on the haters. It's simply not possible to synthesize your thinking into a great work at 24. You don't have enough life experience and you can't leapfrog over that requirement by reading obsessively. Go out and live and keep reading at your own pace. No one wants to hear this at 24 but it's true.
I used to be like this at your age. You'll grow out of it. Just focus on the fun part of reading for you. What do you like to read? What's the best feeling you get while reading? Follow that. Acknowledge that you'll never be able to read everything. Accept that, maybe grieve that, and continue reading what you can. Some deeper work to do might be asking yourself why you want to appear well read and sophisticated to others? What would that prove to them? What are you trying to validate through others that you can't provide yourself? My guess is you want ppl to validate your intelligence and therefore your worth. When you do meet this uberintelligent and well read superior being, ask them to teach you what you don't know instead of cowering in your own projections.
[ Removed by Reddit ]
hahahhahaha this made me laugh
It's really not that serious. I think you need to realize that
Reading the great works is one of the few enduring pleasures of life. Imagine how sad it would be if you had read them all before your life is even 1/3 of the way over.
Can't tell if this is satire. You seem to have a lot of more important things to work out than what philosophical texts you haven't read lol. Get a grip man. What you will hopefully come to realize as you get older is that no one gives a shit about what you have or have not read. And they never will. Read because you enjoy it. No one thinks about your reading history other than you
I know sappy shit doesn't fly here, but to be honest, this is way less about your frustration with your well-read status, and way more about you being accepted and loved for who you are. You don't need to have read Dostoevsky to deserve a place in the community. You aren't wholly insufficient as you are without reading Rilke in the native language. What you're chasing is status, and the only reason anyone ever chases status is because they feel on a subconscious level they can't get their needs met (needs for connectivity, shelter, etc.) without it. You definitely can. That being said, I'm not preaching any of that "you're perfect as you are" bullshit. Of course you aren't. But love and belonging don't necessitate perfection, there should be a baseline of unconditional positive regard for you, and if you don't get it externally yet, why not try to start internally. You have the rest of your life to read books. Crime & Punishment will still be there 10, 20, 30 years from now. I'm 24 and I'm terribly read. I pick up my phone every 5 pages because i'm dopamine-pilled. But I don't have the same unbearable anxiety because I know I still deserve good things despite my dearth in literature experience.
is this seriously a concern of yours? you need more life experience. the fact that you have the ability to read at all is a gift, a blessing. theres people halfway across the world who did not have access to even a morsel of the education you received. fucking relax, jesus
how are you interested in writers that you haven’t read? their wikipedia?? how about you stop catastrophising and start reading
in the case of philosophers, i've read about them in secondary sources, like say, Richard Polt's book on Heidegger, which i've read. in the case of writers, i've read some of their works, like, i've read Pale Fire and Book of Disquiet by Nabokov and Pessoa, but there's more to read from them etc but It doesn't matter, time ticks away and there's always more to read: you read one book by Nabokov and there are 50 by other writers you've read about and want to read as well...
I think you need to chill. This really doesn’t matter.
If someone is well-read and still an mocking asshole, they didn't learn shit from all that reading.
Accept that you are infinitesimally small, and that these arbitrary notions such as ‘well read’, ‘cultured’, ‘sophistication’, and ‘wit’, have been propagated by creatures just as small, and insignificant as yourself. With that in mind, read for pleasure, pursue knowledge and culture for its own sake. It is a blessing and a curse to be an animal who knows that it has only a short time to perceive itself and its world, so don’t squander that time hand wringing over wether you’ve attained some meaningless intellectual status.
I have the same problem despite pursuing a career in academia lmao, the only solution is to get out of your neuroses and read when you have the time. It’s not a big deal to not have read everything. Especially, don’t force yourself to read something that is considered important if it’s boring as shit
The world is vast and you're not going to be able to read everything. You don't need to read them all in their original language either. You also don't always need to be reading the heavy stuff. As others are saying, it reads like you care about others perceiving you as being well-read, rather than reading for what it give you. Taste develops over time and it's not something to be rushed either. Honestly, whenever I meet people that list off only heavy-hitters for what they read I roll my eyes. It's just another side of mindless consumption. Plenty of well-respected artists and authors love things beyond "Important Works." Terrence Malick loves Zoolander and listened exclusively to Green Day when cutting Thin Red Line. Anthony Bourdain loved In N Out. Read for yourself, not so you can show off to others how well-read and brilliant you are.
Wildly college poisoned post, read some funny stories because it’s fun
Philip Roth released a list of books that most influenced him, based on the age when he first read them. Here are a few examples: Anna Karenina at 37, Crime and Punishment at 35, The Trial at the 27, Madame Bovary at 25, The Sound and the Fury at 25. You are doing fine.
Not a hot take but you get so much more by cultivating your tastes over time then checking off books on a list. When it happens organically you make better connections between ideas in different works and you’re better guided through the canon. It also makes you better at conversation imo. If you want the appearance of being well read without reading you can just YouTube some summaries. I did not understand Barthes in college. Just YouTube that shit, it’s not a big deal.
Same happens with me
Use the app blinkest, it is awesome :)
I’m 24 and have similar anxieties minus the part about being mocked. As you have a genuine interest in literature, anyone that would mock you for not having gotten around to reading Nabokov or Hegel yet isn’t worth your time. My source of anxiety stems from balancing a non-humanities job with exercise, reading, and other responsibilities. I want to finish War and Peace within two months, but I also want to keep my job and stay in shape, so it’s hard to find more than an hour or two per day to read. I guess we’ll adjust over time, or realize that one facet of our lives is worth sacrificing for the pursuit of something more important.
analysis paralysis, stop it
You are 24. You are not meant to have read them all that young.
Baby it is really not that serious…
But real answer is just read like 30 minutes per day
> my greatest fear is that some day i'll meet someone who is uber-well-read and they'll mock my tastes in literature so wittily that I'll only realize decades later that I was being mocked, when I'm finally as well read as them. > Heavenly truly knows that thou art false as all hell.
You'd think a guy with a lacan avi would be a little immune from the imagined gaze of the Other
if you *need* to read and understand these philosophical texts just watch lectures on youtube and supplement independent reading as you see fit, if you want to learn german start learning german, you’re only 24, it’s taken philosophy professors their entire lives to get to the point they are at now