Books to read before you die

On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 05:47:06 GMT, Catawumpus <kimmerian RemoveThis @fastmail.fm> wrote:

>Bill Baldwin <bbwebpage+usenet@gmail.com>:
>
>> It's been years since I read the Nag Hammadi Library. But I recall
>> enough to say that there isn't such a thing as "the gnostic outlook".
>
> You seeem to be forgetting that the Nag Hammadi Library is
>a miscellany containing gnostic scriptures, Hermetic
>philosophy, wisdom teachings, a fragment of Plato, and so forth.
>
> Of course gnosticism isn't monolithic. Many schools, many
>writings, no two entirely alike, some differing within
>themselves. But the NHL doesn't remove the gnostic outlook any
>more than the British Library does yours.
>
>> Pullman's moralizing angels ring in some variations on standard
>> gnostic themes and fit comfortably within the gnostic conversation.
>
> Not so. Gnosticism characteristically rejects Creator and
>Creation, lowering the maker of this misbegotten world from
>supreme deity to inferior demiurge and taking a correspondingly
>negative view of his work. Pullman's angels do just the
>opposite: they excuse the Creator from the complaints they aim
>at the Authority and preach cheerful surrender to life's
>dictates, the very antithesis of the gnostics' cosmic rebellion.

Nonetheless, Pullman's notion of god is closer to the Gnostic view than the
Christian one:

Source: Pagels 1981:70.
"The gnostic teacher Justinus describes the Lord's shock,
terror and anxiety 'when he discovered that he was not the God
of the universe'. Gradually his shock gave way to wonder, and
finally he came to welcome what Wisdom had taught him. The
teacher concludes: 'This is the meaning of the saying, "The
fear of the Lord is the beginning of Wisdom."'"


--
Steve Hayes
Web: http://hayesfam.bravehost.com/litmain.htm
http://www.librarything.com/catalog/hayesstw
http://www.bookcrossing.com/mybookshelf/Methodius
 >> Stay informed about: Books to read before you die 

> Source: Pagels 1981:70.
> "The gnostic teacher Justinus describes the Lord's shock,
> terror and anxiety 'when he discovered that he was not the God
> of the universe'. Gradually his shock gave way to wonder, and
> finally he came to welcome what Wisdom had taught him. The
> teacher concludes: 'This is the meaning of the saying, "The
> fear of the Lord is the beginning of Wisdom."'"

Interesting. That pun would not work in Turkish, where you would
use different syntax to express a human's fear of the Lord and the
Lord's fear of something else (the object of the verb "to fear"
takes the ablative in Turkish). Presumably it does work in Greek
as it does in English. How about Hebrew?

============== j-c ====== @ ====== purr . demon . co . uk ==============
Jack Campin: 11 Third St, Newtongrange EH22 4PU, Scotland | tel 0131 660 4760
<http://www.purr.demon.co.uk/jack/> for CD-ROMs and free | fax 0870 0554 975
stuff: Scottish music, food intolerance, & Mac logic fonts | mob 07800 739 557
 >> Stay informed about: Books to read before you die 

Jack Campin - bogus address (bogus@purr.demon.co.uk) wrote:

>> Source: Pagels 1981:70.
>> "The gnostic teacher Justinus describes the Lord's shock,
>> terror and anxiety 'when he discovered that he was not the God
>> of the universe'. Gradually his shock gave way to wonder, and
>> finally he came to welcome what Wisdom had taught him. The
>> teacher concludes: 'This is the meaning of the saying, "The
>> fear of the Lord is the beginning of Wisdom."'"
>
> Interesting. That pun would not work in Turkish, where you would
> use different syntax to express a human's fear of the Lord and the
> Lord's fear of something else (the object of the verb "to fear"
> takes the ablative in Turkish). Presumably it does work in Greek
> as it does in English. How about Hebrew?
>

Yes, the pun works perfectly well in Greek. I'm pretty sure it works
equally well in Hebrew. But with Greek, I can recall the name of the
rule involved ("subjective" vs. "objective" genitive).

--
Bill Baldwin
http://bettercovenant.wordpress.com/
 >> Stay informed about: Books to read before you die 

Steve Hayes <hayesmstw DeleteThis @hotmail.com>:

> Pullman's notion of god is

Pullman's theology isn't what you think. According to you
Christians worship the demiurge in his books. Not true.
Yahweh -- the orthodox Christian diety -- is explicitly said to
_not_ be demiurgical, as I already reminded you. "He was
never the creator," the angel Balthamos states, making nonsense
of your idea.

> closer to the Gnostic view than the Christian one:

You're confused. Gnosticism more often than not is a form
of Christianity -- possibly the original one, tho that's a
literally ancient debate -- and Pullman stands in opposition to
the gnostic perspective by exempting the Creator from the
criticism aimed at his villains (the Authority, et al.) as well
as by affirming material existence, while his angels'
preaching about hard work, patience, and cheery-eyed submission
to the demands of worldly life would be at home in any
conventional Christian Sunday-school. You got it all backwards.

> Source: Pagels 1981:70.

Actually you're quoting Pagels' popular book, _The Gnostic
Gospels_, which came out in 1979.

> "The gnostic teacher Justinus describes the Lord's shock,
> terror and anxiety 'when he discovered that he was not the God
> of the universe'. Gradually his shock gave way to wonder, and
> finally he came to welcome what Wisdom had taught him. The
> teacher concludes: 'This is the meaning of the saying, "The
> fear of the Lord is the beginning of Wisdom."'"

Pagels' source, Hippolytus, credits the above to Basilides
instead of Justinus, and to complicate things there are two
very different acounts: the one provided by Hippolytus and the
earlier version found in Irenaeus. Anyway, the story in
Hippolytus plainly labels the Lord the demiurge and assigns him
"the entire celestial creation" (see _Refutation_ 7.10) in
obvious contrast to Pullman's narrative, where the Authority is
_not_ the maker of this world.

-- Catawumpus
 >> Stay informed about: Books to read before you die 

Troels Forchhammer wrote:
> In message <news:m1fcl357cspmu7r3l0ou30da7i983e56mu@4ax.com>
> Steve Hayes <hayesmstw RemoveThis @hotmail.com> spoke these staves:
>> British librarians have compiled a list of 30 books to read before
>> you die.
>
> Interesting list.
>
> The English-speaking bias is obvious -- I would, for instance, list
> some of Astrid Lindgren's children's literature (e.g. /The Brothers
> Lionheart/) above both Milne and Pullman. And of course any Danish
> librarian's list would include some Hans Christian Andersen as well
> as, probably, some Kierkegaard -- at least (I might come up with more
> Danish authors that Danes ought to read before they die <G>).

I read some Astrid Lindgren as a child -- I'd say Pippi Longstocking
is well-known here in the U.S.

> In connection to that, it made me wonder to find no Shakespeare or
> Chaucer on the list.

It's possible to rationalize the absence of Shakespeare on the grounds
that he never wrote any _books_ -- he wrote poems, and plays which
weren't published within his lifetime.

>> It has some strange inclusions, and some strange omissions.
>>
>> One of the inclusions is "Lord of the Rings".
>>
>> Well, no surprise there.
>
>
>
> I wouldn't be surprised to find that also on a similar Danish list.
>
> <snip>
>
>> None of C.S. Lewis's stories made the list,
>
> I've only ever read the Narnia books, but I wasn't really impressed
> by them. By all means, they're an enjoyable read and all that, but
> that is, as you note, not a sufficient requirement to make a "must
> read" list.

I actually prefer his science fiction trilogy, and probably /Till
we Have Faces/, to any of the Narnia books.

(snip)

> But if that is the case, one can only bemoan that Beowulf didn't make
> it on the list as well (surely it is available in mordernised form in
> English?)

There are a great many translations into modern English, and one of
them (by Seamus Heaney) actually made the bestseller lists a few
years ago.

>> Actually, I'd rate the Harry Potter books above Pullman's ones,
>> although I wouldn't say that they were ones you ought to read
>> before you die.
>
> I'd put the Potter books above Pullman's for simple entertainment and
> excitement value and for scope of sub-creation, but technically (in
> terms such as e.g. plot holes, internal consistency and use of
> language) and in terms of importance[#] I would put His Dark
> Materials above the Potter books.
>
> [#] I'm lacking a better word to convey the sense of having an agenda
> that ought to be important -- of raising a an important discussion,
> even if the solution offered is wide off the mark.
>

"Gravitas", perhaps?

I'd now say that the Potter books are of very uneven quality -- I
didn't much like the first one, the second one was excellent, books
three and four were impossible to put down, five was almost as good,
but the interest was mostly gone again in the sixth and seventh books.

> <snip>
>
>> How many have you read, and can you think of better choices?
>
> Meaning "read" as in really read, I don't think I've read more than a
> handful besides LotR: the Bible, /A Clockwork Orange/, /Winnie the
> Pooh/, /All Quiet on the Western Front/ and /The Wind in the Willows/
> (except /A Clockwork Orange/, I've read them in Danish).
>
> My own list would probably reflect that I'm Danish, including more
> Danish authors than any non-Dane would
>
> Apart from that my list would probably have a rather higher average
> age -- a saga, some myths and legends (Norse, Greek, Roman, Indian,
> Chinese, Finnish, Russian . . . I don't know for sure) and some
> other books with more than a couple of hundred years behind them.
>

I've read several more than that, but mostly different ones, and none
which the OP hasn't also read. As far as literary classics go, I'd
want to include:

the /Commedia/, by Dante Alighieri
Heart of Darkness, by Joseph Conrad
Lord Jim, also by Conrad
Crime and Punishment, by Fyodor Dostoevsky
The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, by Mark Twain
Nearly everything else by Twain...(*)
Catch-22, by Joseph Heller

(*) Possibly my own nationality is showing here!

I've never been able to decide whether /Huckleberry Finn/ or /LotR/
is my #1 favorite. It's rather odd that each is a sequel to a much
shorter novel (/The Adventures of Tom Sawyer/ and /The Hobbit/,
respectively) and that the shorter novels were each originally
written primarily for children. I'd better warn non-native English
speakers that /Huck Finn/ contains quite a bit of now-obsolete
regional dialect, not all of which is comprehensible to Americans
today! The general sense of the dialogue is nearly always clear,
though.
 >> Stay informed about: Books to read before you die 

"Derek Broughton" <news.TakeThisOut@pointerstop.ca> skrev i meddelandet
news:15995505.HsbnBNCKRD@cedar.serverforest.com...
> Öjevind Lång wrote:

[snip]
>>
>>> In the genre, I think the Alice books are better than "The master and
>>> Margarita", and among Russian authors, yes, I think Dostoevsky is
>>> better.
>>>
>> I emphatically disagree, but obviously, this is a matter of differing
>> tastes. I must confess that I am puzzled by your placing children's books
>> such as "Alice"
>
> Heretic! While there is no doubt that Mr. Dodgson wrote /Alice/ as
> stories
> to tell to children, they go well beyond being "children's books". Now,
> I'm going to have to go back and reread /The Annotated Alice/ (and, I
> suppose, have to add /The Master and Margarita/ to my list).

I don't think you'll regret it, Derek.

Öjevind
 >> Stay informed about: Books to read before you die 

Öjevind Lång wrote:

> "Derek Broughton" <news DeleteThis @pointerstop.ca> skrev i meddelandet
> news:15995505.HsbnBNCKRD@cedar.serverforest.com...

>> I'm going to have to go back and reread /The Annotated Alice/ (and, I
>> suppose, have to add /The Master and Margarita/ to my list).
>
> I don't think you'll regret it, Derek.

More people in my vicinity must be reading this thread. I just went to the
library website to reserve /The Master and Margarita/ and find I'm 7th on
the list. That's pretty unusual for a book not on a current best-seller
list.
--
derek
 >> Stay informed about: Books to read before you die 

On Dec 5, 5:03 pm, Steve Hayes <hayesm....DeleteThis@hotmail.com> wrote:
> British librarians have compiled a list of 30 books to read before you die.

Have they also suggested how one should live?

> It has some strange inclusions, and some strange omissions.
>
> One of the inclusions is "Lord of the Rings".

It was our Rapid Reader course book in English, in Std 8, St, Xavier's
School, Doranda, Ranchi, India in 1969. A strange, wrong, book - well
written in parts.

Arindam Banerjee
 >> Stay informed about: Books to read before you die 

Arindam Banerjee wrote:
>
>> It has some strange inclusions, and some strange omissions.
>>
>> One of the inclusions is "Lord of the Rings".
>
> It was our Rapid Reader course book in English, in Std 8, St, Xavier's
> School, Doranda, Ranchi, India in 1969. A strange, wrong, book - well
> written in parts.

Wow. You really should check your crossposts before you write things like
that. You're not likely to find much support for that opinion in
rec.arts.books.tolkien or alt.books.inklings, and probably not even in
alt.books.cs-lewis.

"Strange" is OK, but "wrong" is quite wrong, and it's true that it's well
written in parts, but those are _all_ the parts.
--
derek
 >> Stay informed about: Books to read before you die 

"Catawumpus" <kimmerian.DeleteThis@fastmail.fm> skrev i meddelandet
news:kimmerian-5E20A3.01550811122007@news.verizon.net...
> Derek Broughton <news.DeleteThis@pointerstop.ca>:

[snip]

> One day an angry lady stopped me on the street and
> said she did not like a book I wrote but that if I
> lived up to the best in me I might write a good
> Christian novel like _The Cardinal_ by Henry Morton
> Robinson or perhaps even _The Foundling_ by Cardinal
> Spellman.
>
> Walker Percy, from "Notes for a Novel about the End of the
> World."

Those two can't hold a candle to "The Archbishop" by Pope Benedict XVI, not
to mention "The Pope" by God.

Öjevind
 >> Stay informed about: Books to read before you die 

"Derek Broughton" <news.RemoveThis@pointerstop.ca> skrev i meddelandet
news:3897479.RgYWmi7J5Z@cedar.serverforest.com...
> Öjevind Lång wrote:
>
>> "Derek Broughton" <news.RemoveThis@pointerstop.ca> skrev i meddelandet
>> news:15995505.HsbnBNCKRD@cedar.serverforest.com...
>
>>> I'm going to have to go back and reread /The Annotated Alice/ (and, I
>>> suppose, have to add /The Master and Margarita/ to my list).
>>
>> I don't think you'll regret it, Derek.
>
> More people in my vicinity must be reading this thread. I just went to
> the
> library website to reserve /The Master and Margarita/ and find I'm 7th on
> the list. That's pretty unusual for a book not on a current best-seller
> list.

Good news!

Öjevind
 >> Stay informed about: Books to read before you die 

"Derek Broughton" <news RemoveThis @pointerstop.ca> wrote in message
news:3041593.PtQjeHsWea@cedar.serverforest.com...
> Arindam Banerjee wrote:
>>
>>> It has some strange inclusions, and some strange omissions.
>>>
>>> One of the inclusions is "Lord of the Rings".
>>
>> It was our Rapid Reader course book in English, in Std 8, St, Xavier's
>> School, Doranda, Ranchi, India in 1969. A strange, wrong, book - well
>> written in parts.
>
> Wow. You really should check your crossposts before you write things like
> that.

Oh dear, I usually neglect the crossposts, as I take life as it comes. In
this case I take it as an obvious issue that the original poster thought it
meet that all the ngs would be interested in this topic, and wanted
follow-ups on the topic to be posted to all the ngs. Where am I mistaken in
taking this approach?

>You're not likely to find much support for that opinion in
> rec.arts.books.tolkien or alt.books.inklings, and probably not even in
> alt.books.cs-lewis.

Why? It is religion to them, or what? I mean, is it a matter of faith to
them that Golding is scripture, beyond catcalls? I thought we were
commenting on literary efforts here, and self-censorship was limited to not
making personal attacks going by Usenet posting standards. Are the beliefs
of the Golding cultists that shaky?

> "Strange" is OK, but "wrong" is quite wrong, and it's true that it's well
> written in parts, but those are _all_ the parts.

Wow, what support for Golding! I must say that I was being rather kind to
Golding. My classmates found it ridiculous as a whole - looks like the
indoctrination of the concept of evil being inherent in humans did not make
any inroads into their young minds. In my case, the parts I liked were
those related to Simon, who stood for research, and thus, when the wrong
supernatural elements in the book are deleted, found out that the reasons
for our fears are unfounded - it is fear for its own sake that is the
greatest enemy, and indeed such was the cause of his death.
> --
> derek
 >> Stay informed about: Books to read before you die 

On Dec 17, 1:06 am, Steve Hayes <hayesm... DeleteThis @hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 16 Dec 2007 12:48:45 GMT, "Arindam Banerjee" <adda1... DeleteThis @bigpond.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >"Derek Broughton" <n... DeleteThis @pointerstop.ca> wrote in message
> >news:3041593.PtQjeHsWea@cedar.serverforest.com...
> >> Arindam Banerjee wrote:
>
> >>>> It has some strange inclusions, and some strange omissions.
>
> >>>> One of the inclusions is "Lord of the Rings".
>
> >>> It was our Rapid Reader course book in English, in Std 8, St, Xavier's
> >>> School, Doranda, Ranchi, India in 1969. A strange, wrong, book - well
> >>> written in parts.
>
> >> Wow. You really should check your crossposts before you write things like
> >> that.
>
> >Oh dear, I usually neglect the crossposts, as I take life as it comes. In
> >this case I take it as an obvious issue that the original poster thought it
> >meet that all the ngs would be interested in this topic, and wanted
> >follow-ups on the topic to be posted to all the ngs. Where am I mistaken in
> >taking this approach?
>
> They were all ngs to do with books, so it was on topic in all of them.

Thanks.
>
> >>You're not likely to find much support for that opinion in
> >> rec.arts.books.tolkien or alt.books.inklings, and probably not even in
> >> alt.books.cs-lewis.
>
> >Why? It is religion to them, or what? I mean, is it a matter of faith to
> >them that Golding is scripture, beyond catcalls? I thought we were
> >commenting on literary efforts here, and self-censorship was limited to not
> >making personal attacks going by Usenet posting standards. Are the beliefs
> >of the Golding cultists that shaky?
>
> Methings you are confusing "Lord of the rings" with "Lord of the flies",
> though both were on the list.

Indeed I was, but as you say they were both on the list.
>
> >> "Strange" is OK, but "wrong" is quite wrong, and it's true that it's well
> >> written in parts, but those are _all_ the parts.
>
> >Wow, what support for Golding! I must say that I was being rather kind to
> >Golding. My classmates found it ridiculous as a whole - looks like the
> >indoctrination of the concept of evil being inherent in humans did not make
> >any inroads into their young minds. In my case, the parts I liked were
> >those related to Simon, who stood for research, and thus, when the wrong
> >supernatural elements in the book are deleted, found out that the reasons
> >for our fears are unfounded - it is fear for its own sake that is the
> >greatest enemy, and indeed such was the cause of his death.
>
> I think the support was more likely to be for Tolkien, since it was his work
> you originally named.

I have not read the works of Tolkien. I must apologize for my mistake
to the Tolkien supporters. Global warming at work, I suppose! Makes
one mistake rings for flies.
>
> --
> Steve Hayes
> Web:http://hayesfam.bravehost.com/litmain.htm
> http://www.librarything.com/catalog/hayesstw
> http://www.bookcrossing.com/mybookshelf/Methodius- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
 >> Stay informed about: Books to read before you die