What to read next?

I envy readers who approach their reading systemically, readers for whom reading is a process of getting to the bottom of a few private obsessions. Systematic readers may not always know what book comes next—but they will at least be able to narrow it down to a few good candidates. I mean, if you’re obsessed with the Soviet erotica, there’s a good chance that your next book will about Soviet erotica. (I assume such a thing existed.)

Then there are also readers who read purely as an aesthetic experience. I hold nothing but admiration for these readers.  There are some—or, so  I imagine, because I am not like this—who view each book as an opportunity to, in the words of Walter Pater, “burn always with this hard, gemlike flame.”  (How many moody undergraduate humanities students over the years have swooned to these words just before deciding to take on a lifetime of financial aid debt to pursue an MA in Art History?) For these readers, there’s a good chance you’ll be satisfied with some random 19th century Russian and French doorstop.

My approach to reading is neither especially admirable or worthy of envy.  Though I have my interests and sense of beauty, my reading philosophy can best be summed up as “eclectic nerd.”  There is a dutiful part of me—a smattering of Midwestern rectitude I inherited from my Ohio parents—that says that you do certain things because you darn well should.  I feel this way about books sometimes. There are certain books I should read because, damn it, I should read something at some point by Balzac or Günter Grass or (I suppose) Joyce Carol Oates.

Eclectic nerds like myself want to balance reading something new with reading a classic they blew off in college with reading about world religions they find vaguely ridiculous with trying to finally figure out what the hell the Frankfurt School actually was with learning about what America has done to poor brown-skinned people in remote parts of the world. 

As a result, putting down one book and picking up another for me can be a surprisingly difficult. Earlier this week I finished John O’Hara’s Appointment in Samarra. On my desk in front of me is normally a neat stack of books that I collected because they seem like books I really should read. I have been going through these books for the past two days, trying to decide what book I want to/should read next. The books are now clumped in scattered piles. 

In the off chance you have an opinion, here are some of my options:

  • I like the idea of reading Ford Madox Ford’s The Good Soldier because it’s on the Modern Library’s list of top 100 books—and because I enjoy the fact that the author’s first and last name are the same. (I like William Carlos Williams for the same reason–oh, and his poetry’s pretty good, too.) 
  • I meant to read The Decline of the West when I was 21 and was ready to flush Western Civilization down the drain. But has anyone read this outside of a course reading list during the past 75 years?
  • Boethius’ The Consolation of Philosophy appeals to me because maybe it will teach me to console myself with a little philosophy rather than single malt Scotch. Besides, I should probably know a little something about what it was like at the court of Theodoric during the sixth century, right?
  • Reinhold Niebuhr’s The Irony of American History, because the publisher managed to slap a blurb from president Barack Obama on the cover. 
  • I’m wondering if Richard Yates’ Revolutionary Road is close enough to being out of fashion again that I should finally bother with it.
  • Nathaneal West’s Miss Lonelyhearts/The Day of the Locust, for some reason.
  • The Spy Who Came In From the Cold.  Because maybe I’ll like spy thrillers.
  • Vanity Fair was one of TS Eliot’s favorite novel (an endorsement you might consider a little dubious) but every time I look at its 10,000 or so pages I start seeing if there’s a book on my bookshelf with zombies on the cover. (Speaking of zombies, World War Z is also on my desk—Studs Terkels meets, uh, zombies!)
  • Edmund Burke’s Reflections on the Revolution in France. I am starting to wonder if I might be closer to an English Tory than an American Democrat. Then again: Margaret Thatcher.
  • The Wisdom of Insecurity. Because I aspire to be the most restless/impatient/distracted Buddhist in history, coked-up Hollywood Buddhists excepted.
  • Etc.

Any thoughts?

(Rfslack)

Advertisements

7 responses to “What to read next?

  1. The only ones I’ve read on that list are The Spy Who Came In From the Cold, the Nathaniel West, and World War Z.

    Avoid World War Z. It’s terrible. it’s so incredibly bad that I wouldn’t have finished it if I hadn’t been literally incapable of getting out of bed and getting another book until my girlfriend got home from work hours later when I started in on it. It is so terrible. Such a wasted opportunity. Great ideas, but some of the worst cliches and writing around, and a deus ex machina at the end to cap it all off. Really terrible.

    On the other hand, Nathaniel West and The Spy… are both great books, and they have the virtue of being quick reads. Read one of them next, I say, and put the World War Z out on the stoop or up on paperbackswap and never let it sully your apartment again.

    • I actually started World War Z at on point and thought, “What a clever concept.” And then I got distracted by other things before going back and seeing it if holds up. Sounds like it doesn’t.

  2. I’d skip the Decline of the West. Overrated. The Spy Who Came in From the Cold is an excellent book, but not really representative of the spy thriller genre – it is very dark and very well written, two things the average spy novel are not.

    Revolutionary Road remains one of the darkest and most depressing books I have ever read. I loved every page of it. If the hints of spring in the air are getting you excited about life’s opportunities, this is the book to bring you back down to depressed horror at the state of human affairs.

    • Everything I’ve ever heard about Revolutionary Road has both been offputting and has convinced me that the book is great. But I’ve also reached a juncture where I feel like I should hit some of the books I should have gotten to before now.

    • I am digelhted that we have such similar approaches to reading. I would skip The Decline of the West, unless you are thinking about becoming an esoteric, quasi-mystical fascist. You can’t go wrong with Miss Lonelyhearts/Day of the Locust. A quick read, and really good. It would go nicely with that O’Hara you just finished.And if you ever want to start reading some J.C. Oates, I’d start with “The Collector of Hearts.”

  3. I am delighted that we have such similar approaches to reading. I would skip The Decline of the West, unless you are thinking about becoming an esoteric, quasi-mystical fascist. You can’t go wrong with Miss Lonelyhearts/Day of the Locust. A quick read, and really good. It would go nicely with that O’Hara you just finished.

    And if you ever want to start reading some J.C. Oates, I’d start with “The Collector of Hearts.”

  4. I like the esoteric, quasi-mystical part. And I’m a Democrat which, according to the leading political minds of our generation (Glenn Beck and Laura Ingraham), is the same thing as being a fascist–so I’m kind of half way there.

    I also have An Economic Interpretation of the Constitution of the United States which I bought solely on your recommendation. But the title is just a tad daunting…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s