4 ms·
First of all, I think you're confusing correlation and causation here: "It seems that the sort of people who enjoy Homer are, to a first approximation, the sam
by bdr 14y ago
First of all, I think you're confusing correlation and causation here:
"It seems that the sort of people who enjoy Homer are, to a first approximation, the same sort of people as those who enjoy Joyce, or any other literary work where it is difficult to figure out what the author means."
For example, Nabokov is much more accessible than Joyce, but the same people who like Ulysses are likely to enjoy Lolita.
Second, I would ask whether you enjoy any literature. Some people like words more than others. What do you like to read? Do you read poetry? Not everyone has to. People who study music tend to like more "inaccessible" music like Bach or Mahler or whatever, and I presume you don't think it's because they're being pretentious. I listen to more mainstream music. But words, I get and love.
I haven't read the Iliad, but I loved The Odyssey. I read it for the first time two years ago (age: 26, translation: Fagles). It's full of sex and violence and dramatic tension. Expecting a dusty classic, I was surprised by how engaging it was.
- impendia 14y agoI do enjoy some literature. Huck Finn, 1984 and Animal Farm, Brave New World, Jane Eyre, Lord of the Rings come to mind. Didn't care for the Iliad, but I enjoyed Plato. But you mention enjoying words. Now that I think of it, I don't typically enjoy words. I enjoy the ideas that words convey, so I happily read a ton of books, but when the writing is not straightforward I quickly lose interest. And I do theoretical math and try to persuade calculus students that it's a fantastic subject, so I certainly can't accuse anyone of being pretentious when they enjoy something I don't!
- bdr 14y agoGood point. Not all literature depends on a love of language in the way that Joyce and Nabokov do. That might be the key distinction.