By Lunch--the List of Shame
And by "lunch," I mean of course, half a vanilla powerbar. Ugh.
Anyway, I have graded all the papers I needed for 311--which means I'm set for grading 311. Also, I read Freakonomics. Two things from this, one proud and one shameful. The first is, of course, how cool am I for being able to read a book in one sitting (well, two, because I got kicked out of the study room in which I was reading and then sat in the bookshelves to finish it)? The second is, how on earth have I gone this long without reading what is arguably the most popular book on economic thought ever? I know, it was on my shame list, much as Crime and Punishment was before last year.
I don't know who it was who told me about the list of books of shame. I think it was an English teacher, someone kind of quirky--Rutter? or Hickman?--but he said that everyone has a list of books that he or she is ashamed of not having read. I think the example was "To Kill a Mockingbird." Newsweek even had this section where they interviewed up and coming folk about their five favorite books and movies and then asked for a book that "upon rereading was disappointing" and a classic that they've never read. Recently, though, I've noticed that this last catagory has been often slipped out in favor of something like "a book that parents should read to their children." Maybe it's become shameful to admit we haven't read something classic.
Orson Scott Card was asked, upon his most recent visit to BYU, what classic he had never read and he responded, in classic Card intellectual-bellicose manner, that he was rich and if he wanted a book, by golly, he could buy it and if he wanted to read a book, he could make time to read it. So I became ashamed of even having a list of shame.
Still, I've been a busy girl. With my grading schedule and a 500-page book a week for Victorian Rhetoric, I've had plenty to keep me busy. I've read a little for fun: White Man's Burden, Tess of the D'Urbervilles, plenty of magazines. But sometimes it's hard to sit down and read through those books you've seen and seen again, but never had the guts to approach because you weren't sure you could spare the time, or would see it through to the end (this is sounding more like asking for a first date than picking up a book). Now, though, now I can search for committment. I have 19 hours to hang out in the library and, by golly, they have books here and I have time.
Anyway, I have graded all the papers I needed for 311--which means I'm set for grading 311. Also, I read Freakonomics. Two things from this, one proud and one shameful. The first is, of course, how cool am I for being able to read a book in one sitting (well, two, because I got kicked out of the study room in which I was reading and then sat in the bookshelves to finish it)? The second is, how on earth have I gone this long without reading what is arguably the most popular book on economic thought ever? I know, it was on my shame list, much as Crime and Punishment was before last year.
I don't know who it was who told me about the list of books of shame. I think it was an English teacher, someone kind of quirky--Rutter? or Hickman?--but he said that everyone has a list of books that he or she is ashamed of not having read. I think the example was "To Kill a Mockingbird." Newsweek even had this section where they interviewed up and coming folk about their five favorite books and movies and then asked for a book that "upon rereading was disappointing" and a classic that they've never read. Recently, though, I've noticed that this last catagory has been often slipped out in favor of something like "a book that parents should read to their children." Maybe it's become shameful to admit we haven't read something classic.
Orson Scott Card was asked, upon his most recent visit to BYU, what classic he had never read and he responded, in classic Card intellectual-bellicose manner, that he was rich and if he wanted a book, by golly, he could buy it and if he wanted to read a book, he could make time to read it. So I became ashamed of even having a list of shame.
Still, I've been a busy girl. With my grading schedule and a 500-page book a week for Victorian Rhetoric, I've had plenty to keep me busy. I've read a little for fun: White Man's Burden, Tess of the D'Urbervilles, plenty of magazines. But sometimes it's hard to sit down and read through those books you've seen and seen again, but never had the guts to approach because you weren't sure you could spare the time, or would see it through to the end (this is sounding more like asking for a first date than picking up a book). Now, though, now I can search for committment. I have 19 hours to hang out in the library and, by golly, they have books here and I have time.
Comments
1. Huck Finn
2. Moby Dick
3. The Scarlett Letter
4. Middlemarch
5. anything by Henry James (except "The Beast in the Jungle")
6. The Iliad
7. The Odyssey
...
This is getting super depressing. And we won't even talk about all the theorists and philosophers. Maybe I'll just take a leaf out of Orson Scott Card's book and refuse to be ashamed about anything.
Also, what did you think of freakonomics?
Spoiler: I hated it--interesting concept, genuinely horrible execution. There were a number of incredibly obvious mis-cues concerning the data presented, and it made me sad for the state of professional data interpretation in the popular press.