5 ms·
Came across this nice quote by Kafka recently, which seems relevant: "I think we ought to read only the kind of books that wound or stab us. If the book we're
by f_allwein 10y ago
Came across this nice quote by Kafka recently, which seems relevant:
"I think we ought to read only the kind of books that wound or stab us. If the book we're reading doesn't wake us up with a blow to the head, what are we reading for? So that it will make us happy, as you write? Good Lord, we would be happy precisely if we had no books, and the kind of books that make us happy are the kind we could write ourselves if we had to. But we need books that affect us like a disaster, that grieve us deeply, like the death of someone we loved more than ourselves, like being banished into forests far from everyone, like a suicide. A book must be the axe for the frozen sea within us."
- barking 10y agoI don't know how that would apply to books but I can very much relate to it with newspapers. People read papers that agree with their viewpoints, it's unpleasant reading political opinions that go against one's own. It's cognitive dissonance I suppose.
- VLM 10y agoUnless you intentionally want to convert yourself, the propaganda user experience is generally pretty unpleasant. Agreed that cognitive dissonance could be a part of the part of propaganda that is hatefacts.
- lintiness 10y agoi think everyone ought to read whatever books they fucking want. what's with pretentious assholes always telling everybody what they should and shouldn't do?
- keithpeter 10y agoKafka was himself an author. I think authors like to believe that their work changes people, that books and other writing are not simply content to be tailored for specific demographics. His use of 'we' in the quote sort of suggests that he might be speaking mainly for himself. Perhaps he was just trying to explain his particular kind of want.
- sanoli 10y agoOh, it's because it's Kafka, so it has to be some good advice! edit: typo
- Scarblac 10y agoHe isn't telling you what to do. He is struggling with the question of what the best way to live is, he assumes you are doing the same, and he's offering his opinion on one aspect of it. "Everyone ought to read whatever books they fucking want" isn't that useful as an intellectual opinion. Yes, fine, but what kind of books should we want to read if we want to lead our lives the best way possible? Why read at all?
- lintiness 10y agoif i want to read something that makes me laugh or gives me an escape for a few hours, who are you guys to tell me i'm wasting my time? mind your own damn business.
- sanderjd 10y agoHonest question: what is the philosophical basis for the trend I seem to often see (expressed here as "Why read at all?") that pure entertainment is not a valid part of "the best way to live"?
- mikestew 10y agoJust off the top of my head, some schools of Buddhism come to mind. Then after a few more seconds it occurs to me that most major religions have some form of ascetic system that frowns upon indulgences such as pure entertainment. In other words, you can have your choice of philosophical bases. That addresses the "where does it come from?" but not the "why", which I would generalize as entertainment distracts from the pursuit of a better way of living.
- sanderjd 10y agoThanks for the answer! I was hoping for more specifics than "some schools of Buddhism" and "ascetic systems from most major religions", but on hindsight I see that asking people to do that level of research for me on a forum like this is too big an ask.
- 10y ago
- f_allwein 10y agoagree that he probably did not mean it as a universal law, but rather meant that he prefers reading books that confuse and bewilder him. As an example, here's a really short story of his, "A Little Fable": " "Alas", said the mouse, "the whole world is growing smaller every day. At the beginning it was so big that I was afraid, I kept running and running, and I was glad when I saw walls far away to the right and left, but these long walls have narrowed so quickly that I am in the last chamber already, and there in the corner stands the trap that I am running into." "You only need to change your direction," said the cat, and ate it up. " https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Little_Fable https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Little_Fable
- mindcrime 10y agoMy take has always been that what you take out of a given book, whether it's Vince Flynn or James Joyce, has more to do with you as a reader, than the book you're reading. That is, if you're the kind of person who thinks deeply about things, looks for insights and connections, questions how things work, etc., you're going to draw some insight from a James Patterson book, or Stephen King or whatever. OTOH, if you're not that kind of person, you can force yourself to grind through mechanically reading the words of Infinite Jest or Gravity's Rainbow, or Ulysses or Finnegan's Wake or whatever, and wind up no better off at the end than if you'd read from a random word generator for the same period of time.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- aerovistae 10y agoI really abhor remarks like this one, suggesting that there are things people "should" or "shouldn't" read. As another commenter remarked, it's pretentious. What's more, it's deceptive, because it sounds sage and insightful and worth pondering, particularly because it's well-worded and comes from a famous author, but in point of fact it's just another guy saying "Read what I deem to be of quality, not what you enjoy reading." His own skill as an author does not change that. There's something of value to be found in most written works, one way or another, and they all have different purposes.
- mikestew 10y agoAs another commenter remarked, it's pretentious. What's pretentious is taking such strong issue with a statement that starts with "I think we ought...". I think you ought to get over yourself, as Kafka was expressing an opinion, one with which you're free to disagree. Argue your dissent, even if it's just "Kafka? Yeah, fuck that guy.", but stamping your foot because you perceived it as some dead guy telling you what to do is just silly, IMO. As to the topic at hand, I like me some entertainment fiction on occasion, but I'll never make the claim that Stephen King's latest changed my life.
- Gargoyle 10y ago"His own skill as an author does not change that." Would you say the same thing about an excellent coder recommending elegant code they didn't write?
- aerovistae 10y agoThere is a difference between a coder recommending certain code they find elegant, and a coder saying "you should not read code that is not written with this design pattern, as it is a waste of yours or anybody's time, because it is not how I write code."
- maldusiecle 10y agoKafka trained as a lawyer, he didn't literally believe that no one should read any book that doesn't create an intense emotional impact. He was a fiction-writer, and he was arguing for a particular model of what fiction can do, which his works certainly embody. Those who interpret words in such a narrow and literalistic way, though, would probably be best off skipping his works.
- davidw 10y agoIf you pick up a newspaper each morning, you get a "blow to the head" if you think about what that news means to people and their families. I read for entertainment or to learn new things about stuff that interests me.