Totally amazing. Many books I was not even aware of! And so important you included Christianity. It's 50 years since I did 'A' level English but I still recall the mind-expansion I experienced when reading so many literary classics, including most of Shakespeare... the student in me still lives!
This is a simple(r) revision of my very long three part post, and a possible simple fix.
I'd recommend putting a very few great books authors at the top separate: Plutarch (Dryden), Herodotus (Grene), Homer (Lattimore) (ancients), Shakespeare, Dante (several translators: Esolen includes helps others don't), Aquinas. Scripture (as LaCordaire points out in common with all tradition: New Testament & Psalms for daily meditation). For the Greeks, I would not too much emphasize them; I also don't really put Plutarch and Herodotus in the category of Homer, but these are more leisurely and easily accessed reads: more wide than deep. Homer is deeper. Shakespeare especially is our own. As he wrote English, he's far more accessible to us. As he's Christian and at the beginning of Modernity, he has special view of past and present. He deserves preeminence.
Secondarily (my preference and you may add / subtract-- some are underrated; and these are more debatable): Beowulf (Serraillier, a short but excellent start, his diction is one of the best and suitable for kids), Chaucer, Thomas More, Cervantes. American: O'Connor, Orestes Brownson's essays. These too are few. One could add countless "philosophers" to this and a couple to the above. However, too easily they lead astray and can be a complete waste of time. I emphasize Klein, only because he points out the intellectual errors of modernity in a way -- and accessibly -- that I don't think anyone else does. And he's not "dangerous" in my opinion, or far less so.
Tertiary: again mine, but here you could note many of the above recommendations. I'd put Lewis' "Abolition", Klein's "Lectures and Essays", Pieper's "Leisure" & "Philosophical Act", La Grange or other intros to Aquinas, Solzhenitsyn, etc.... But there are many, many paths here, and everyone is a bit different. It's easier to make mistakes here and harder to chose correctly: pretty hard to trim down. Interestingly, I just noticed I have disagreements with most on this level: or they miss something at the very least.
The point is to set apart the very few great books, worth spending much time and even more care on, and a second tier of a few additional authors. All the rest is less important; it's more your guidance. The first and second are deep and wide and very few. Most of your books are modern, and several are repetitious. to put another way, if one understands Shakespeare, Aquinas (and I might have to sneak in one more: the slippery Plato because he does reveal an entirely different sort of thinking and writing: he's more Nietzschean perhaps than Nietzsche and I think goes several steps further -- one's Nietzshe failed to make -- and more maddening, but knowledge of this sort is not necessary for almost anyone and the path is dangerous) AND has a deep foundation in the Faith, it's easy to grasp many of the books you cite; indeed any book whatsoever.
But the real foundation is a knowledge of Faith, saints, Scripture, and even more important: advancement in Meditation and Contemplation (and Carmel is safest here), whereby alone Wisdom is attained. Moreover, every one of any station can advance herein, even the illiterate.
As you note of Lacordaire on reading, "I should not advise you to widen the circle of your PHILOSOPHICAL studies, but, on the contrary, to NARROW and concentrate them. Concentration is the prime and sole element of strength…DEPTH always supposes extent, but extent does NOT involve depth." Again, beware: we must not become more Ciceronian than Christian. And curiosity is a forgotten sin of pride, seeking what is above our degree or in neglect of duties. Moreover, the most learned fathers, Origen, Tertullian and Clement of Alexandria all defected from the Faith, I suspect Erasmus too and countless other “learned”: scientia inflat.
First things first. I urge more catechetical writings, spiritual writings, writings on saints and by saints (particularly autobiographies, like Augustine's, Claret's, Therese's, & Van Marcel's). Especially readings on prayer: Divine Intimacy, Lehody's Ways of Mental Prayer, De Sales’ “Intro to the Devout Life”, Brother Lawrence, "The Ideal Jesus, Son of Mary," or Lectio Divina (with Fr. Dave Nix or by other methods). For, this much all can and should do. Some are short and simple, others longer, and there are many paths to mental prayer. And at the least the catechism of St. Pius X which is short and free. LaCordaire recommends a read through of the Bible (and some Catholics I know only read this), followed by lifelong Meditation on Psalms and New Testament (which we get also at daily mass); I would only add the prophets and Wisdom books as good to read a second time, good for prayer and instruction, again second to the above.
In accord with the first observation: deep, deep, deep, not wide, for deep is wide whereas wide is neither really wide nor deep. Stove on Mill is insightful and short (and as artful as he is, Milton is not great), but as Cordelaire says: the ANCIENTS, viz at least 400 years old. Most of these are moderns. So, trim, trim, trim.
PLUTARCH, as you will. John Adams spent his end days contemplating them in Greek; I believe Jefferson too. The only ones I would say “don't miss” are Cincinnatus, Dion, and the little known Timoleon: these seem to me the least flawed (and Dryden's translation is still fresh, free online, and others unreadable), and they are fascinating for several reasons to me. I recommend Grene's translation of HERODOTUS’ "HIstory" (which means inquiry’ in Greek, much over Thucydides) and he gives quite a vast overview of the ancient world: be sure to note WHY he writes. Caveat lector: he can lead to a kind of relativism. Likewise, note ST. BEDE’s purpose: his English history is excellent. The Life of Charlemagne by EINHARD (not Notker, though the comparison is interesting) is worthwhile too. But these are more leisurely: attend to what virtue and vice is, apply it to yourself. Three read throughs over the years of various Lives, as you list, and of the others suffice; myself, I’ve only read Einhard once. HOMER last and first (Lattimore's translations are recommended by almost all, and I particularly like him). But again, be warned: as Aristotle notes, Homer is vastly superior to other writers but also taught them to lie and taught lies: he’s a super subtle, tricksy, deliciously ironic father of the Greeks.
For SHAKESPEARE (and it goes for the Lives too), the plays we most love REVEAL our primary defects and the defect of the times: Hamlet is popular, for we are in a narcissistic age. But these same we least understand, almost none: not Eliot, not Freud understood Hamlet at all, both narcissists. There’s the rub. We know ourselves best in meditation as Augustine wrote: “Cognoscam te, cognitor meus, congoscam sicut et cognitus sum” (May I know you, knower of me; so, may I know myself as I am known). Read these with your kids; my kids enjoyed them on their own, the boys especially Branaugh’s Henry V when they were very young. The best intro is to attend good performances (eg. Spring Green, WI), but Branaugh's production are an easy intro or Marlon Brando’s Caesar: watch them. Then read them to and with your kids. The histories can be very fun, like the Henry IV series. But I must recommend (esp for kids) the Comedies and Romances (the latter are distinctly Catholic, eucatastrophes as Tolkien would say). Not Romeo and Juliet, not MSND, and I hate Macbeth (so dark, Malcolm must leave to learn from the Saint king and marries off set a saint wife irl): these aren’t for kids, and in R&J Shakespeare tears to pieces the idolatry of the false, in vogue, gnostic notion of love – a farcical but fair, just, true critique. My favorite is the Life of More which is only partly Shakespeare's. Shakespeare’s humor is much like “merry” More’s. Julius Caesar is good, but I can't recommend the commentary above: the Ignatius press editions have good intros for the most part (Andrew Moran on Hamlet is several notches above anything I’ve read); Anthony Esolen is helpful too, and Samuel Johnson. Digging in is best; discussion in reading groups can be helpful. HOMER in some ways is better than Shakespeare, but Ben Johnson is worth contemplating and rereading, for his judgement is right: “Soul of the age” AND “for ALL time” which can be said of no other but perhaps Dante. After these, BEOWULF (Serrailier's translation is good for kids since what he skips is above kids' level & the best for to chew and taste the grit of Old English); but Beowulf is a full notch below. CHAUCER, in Middle English, if you can: my favorite language. Thomas MORE’s writings, who is in my top five English writers: not Utopia, but Wegemer's "Sourcebook" I recommend. Perhaps the Song of Roland (Sayers) which is delightful, again a notch below. Shakespeare surpasses all. DANTE if you like him, but he is very challenging, also not in English. I'm a life long student and teacher, and have read many of these dozens of times: DEEP, slow at times, even word by word, but Shakespeare is so wide he encompasses all ages, and Dante eternity as well. Personally, I’m very interested in Curtius’ work above: that age is far too neglected and there are many “lesser” gems, a merrier forgotten time.
Philosophy. Aquinas. There are several good intros, but La Grange may be best (and Minerd has some recent translations). Of moderns, Josef Pieper's "Leisure" and C.S. Lewis "Abolition" (especially his third section, he makes mistakes in the first two) have helped me, as well as Klein's "Lectures and Essays." I don't recommend Plato or Aristotle unless you have twenty years, ancient Greek, and no duties. They were the “darkness” that could not grasp the “light.” GKC is fun but not a “great.” If you want to be challenged, Orestes Brownson is perhaps the greatest American thinker (except his political writings): these are again, easier and shorter essays (much online). Pieper, Klein, La Grange, Lewis are enough to give you a feel for philosophy. Few can (or should) devote their lives to it. And these are not light, but also nothing near Plato who leads one to know that nothing can be known, & he means nothing whatsoever at all. Not sure you want to go there. Again: “lux in tenebris lucet and tenebrae eam non comprehenderunt.” The ancient Greeks and their descendents were the very “wise” who found the cross “foolishness,” to whom the Father did not reveal the Truth as to “the little ones,” ignorant fishermen mostly. I don’t recommend too much philosophy, even Aquinas: most perish by that road, indeed almost every single last one, far more than I realized when I began 33 years ago what I was told a “safe” path. Just ain’t so. Much darkness, little light: and if you stare into the Abyss, it will stare back. As St. Paul and Revelation warn: do not come to know the “abyss of Satan”, one such road is “philosophy”, another hermeticism, gnosticism, or false mysticism which St. Paul wrote against in Galatians, and studying too deeply caused Clement of Alexandria to fall.
As to the rest, skip: if you want to conquer the world, Xenophon is perhaps the greatest strategist before Machiavelli: Leo Strauss will guide you through it. You’ll lose your soul but conquer the world.
For contemporary understanding, I’d recommend (as others) these three Encyclicals: Libertas Praestantissam, Pascendi Dominci Gregis (which is by far the most difficult encyclical), and Mirari Vos (which I’ve not read in ages but others recommend it). Solzhenitsyn's first volume of "Gulag" and his essay "Live not by Lies" are worth a read because of this very moment in history, but I didn’t fully appreciate the essay until my fourth or fifth reading; his short novel “One Day in the Life..” is a quick read. Dostoevky's "Brothers Karamozov" is also worthwhile to understand the times, but Hamlet is far deeper since he saw these times already 500 years ago and reveals better, deeper, wider the causes. Flannery O'Connor is perhaps the only “great” American writer. Her short stories are some very difficult, all worthwhile: dark with impish irony and much deep criticism of the fallen republic, while the Holy Spirit blows where it wills. But even she is secondary to the others and not as universal or profound. Shakespeare (being Catholic as well) contains all we need to know and he wrote in English. It's very difficult to penetrate, impossible to fully plumb, a great work like Homer in translation. We are blessed to have Shakespeare. More's a saint, learned, and again English. Klein I actually number near the greats: his book on math is perhaps the best on math of the last 500 to 2000 years, as well as the best guide to Plato. His lectures make you think. And he's far more ancient Greek than American, modern, or Jew. There are many exceedingly brilliant minds and philosophers who are assured to lead you to madness & perdition: Plato himself implicitly raises the question whether they are not all mad in his “Sophist,” himself foremost imo.
Budziewski above or the like is necessary reading for that we know not marriage or matrimony, but St Chrysostum (Homily 20 on Ephesians) answers the deeper challenges as to what it means to be a SIGN of Christ's union with the Church: his commentaries on Scripture are at New Advent. He was golden-tongued (lit. golden-mouthed) indeed and as pastor and homilist by many thought the greatest Church Father. He also thought Plato had a demon in his ear when he finally got around to cursorily reading him: he may not have been wrong. Complicated. And there’s nothing like his ancient commentaries on Scripture. So, I end where I began: the Church Fathers are underappreciated and deep and wide.
By the way, thank you for putting this list together. The value- which is in getting the recommendations from a trusted source rather than a "100 best books etc." list- is huge.
Totally amazing. Many books I was not even aware of! And so important you included Christianity. It's 50 years since I did 'A' level English but I still recall the mind-expansion I experienced when reading so many literary classics, including most of Shakespeare... the student in me still lives!
YEEEEESS!!.. Exactly what i wanted from you!!
You the man!!
Wonderful! Half the battle is knowing where to look.
This is a simple(r) revision of my very long three part post, and a possible simple fix.
I'd recommend putting a very few great books authors at the top separate: Plutarch (Dryden), Herodotus (Grene), Homer (Lattimore) (ancients), Shakespeare, Dante (several translators: Esolen includes helps others don't), Aquinas. Scripture (as LaCordaire points out in common with all tradition: New Testament & Psalms for daily meditation). For the Greeks, I would not too much emphasize them; I also don't really put Plutarch and Herodotus in the category of Homer, but these are more leisurely and easily accessed reads: more wide than deep. Homer is deeper. Shakespeare especially is our own. As he wrote English, he's far more accessible to us. As he's Christian and at the beginning of Modernity, he has special view of past and present. He deserves preeminence.
Secondarily (my preference and you may add / subtract-- some are underrated; and these are more debatable): Beowulf (Serraillier, a short but excellent start, his diction is one of the best and suitable for kids), Chaucer, Thomas More, Cervantes. American: O'Connor, Orestes Brownson's essays. These too are few. One could add countless "philosophers" to this and a couple to the above. However, too easily they lead astray and can be a complete waste of time. I emphasize Klein, only because he points out the intellectual errors of modernity in a way -- and accessibly -- that I don't think anyone else does. And he's not "dangerous" in my opinion, or far less so.
Tertiary: again mine, but here you could note many of the above recommendations. I'd put Lewis' "Abolition", Klein's "Lectures and Essays", Pieper's "Leisure" & "Philosophical Act", La Grange or other intros to Aquinas, Solzhenitsyn, etc.... But there are many, many paths here, and everyone is a bit different. It's easier to make mistakes here and harder to chose correctly: pretty hard to trim down. Interestingly, I just noticed I have disagreements with most on this level: or they miss something at the very least.
The point is to set apart the very few great books, worth spending much time and even more care on, and a second tier of a few additional authors. All the rest is less important; it's more your guidance. The first and second are deep and wide and very few. Most of your books are modern, and several are repetitious. to put another way, if one understands Shakespeare, Aquinas (and I might have to sneak in one more: the slippery Plato because he does reveal an entirely different sort of thinking and writing: he's more Nietzschean perhaps than Nietzsche and I think goes several steps further -- one's Nietzshe failed to make -- and more maddening, but knowledge of this sort is not necessary for almost anyone and the path is dangerous) AND has a deep foundation in the Faith, it's easy to grasp many of the books you cite; indeed any book whatsoever.
But the real foundation is a knowledge of Faith, saints, Scripture, and even more important: advancement in Meditation and Contemplation (and Carmel is safest here), whereby alone Wisdom is attained. Moreover, every one of any station can advance herein, even the illiterate.
Anyways, my three cents. Like your site.
Great! Thank you!
As you note of Lacordaire on reading, "I should not advise you to widen the circle of your PHILOSOPHICAL studies, but, on the contrary, to NARROW and concentrate them. Concentration is the prime and sole element of strength…DEPTH always supposes extent, but extent does NOT involve depth." Again, beware: we must not become more Ciceronian than Christian. And curiosity is a forgotten sin of pride, seeking what is above our degree or in neglect of duties. Moreover, the most learned fathers, Origen, Tertullian and Clement of Alexandria all defected from the Faith, I suspect Erasmus too and countless other “learned”: scientia inflat.
First things first. I urge more catechetical writings, spiritual writings, writings on saints and by saints (particularly autobiographies, like Augustine's, Claret's, Therese's, & Van Marcel's). Especially readings on prayer: Divine Intimacy, Lehody's Ways of Mental Prayer, De Sales’ “Intro to the Devout Life”, Brother Lawrence, "The Ideal Jesus, Son of Mary," or Lectio Divina (with Fr. Dave Nix or by other methods). For, this much all can and should do. Some are short and simple, others longer, and there are many paths to mental prayer. And at the least the catechism of St. Pius X which is short and free. LaCordaire recommends a read through of the Bible (and some Catholics I know only read this), followed by lifelong Meditation on Psalms and New Testament (which we get also at daily mass); I would only add the prophets and Wisdom books as good to read a second time, good for prayer and instruction, again second to the above.
In accord with the first observation: deep, deep, deep, not wide, for deep is wide whereas wide is neither really wide nor deep. Stove on Mill is insightful and short (and as artful as he is, Milton is not great), but as Cordelaire says: the ANCIENTS, viz at least 400 years old. Most of these are moderns. So, trim, trim, trim.
sorry. What began as a short response, grew and grew. I do appreciate your work and site. Just my two cents.
PLUTARCH, as you will. John Adams spent his end days contemplating them in Greek; I believe Jefferson too. The only ones I would say “don't miss” are Cincinnatus, Dion, and the little known Timoleon: these seem to me the least flawed (and Dryden's translation is still fresh, free online, and others unreadable), and they are fascinating for several reasons to me. I recommend Grene's translation of HERODOTUS’ "HIstory" (which means inquiry’ in Greek, much over Thucydides) and he gives quite a vast overview of the ancient world: be sure to note WHY he writes. Caveat lector: he can lead to a kind of relativism. Likewise, note ST. BEDE’s purpose: his English history is excellent. The Life of Charlemagne by EINHARD (not Notker, though the comparison is interesting) is worthwhile too. But these are more leisurely: attend to what virtue and vice is, apply it to yourself. Three read throughs over the years of various Lives, as you list, and of the others suffice; myself, I’ve only read Einhard once. HOMER last and first (Lattimore's translations are recommended by almost all, and I particularly like him). But again, be warned: as Aristotle notes, Homer is vastly superior to other writers but also taught them to lie and taught lies: he’s a super subtle, tricksy, deliciously ironic father of the Greeks.
For SHAKESPEARE (and it goes for the Lives too), the plays we most love REVEAL our primary defects and the defect of the times: Hamlet is popular, for we are in a narcissistic age. But these same we least understand, almost none: not Eliot, not Freud understood Hamlet at all, both narcissists. There’s the rub. We know ourselves best in meditation as Augustine wrote: “Cognoscam te, cognitor meus, congoscam sicut et cognitus sum” (May I know you, knower of me; so, may I know myself as I am known). Read these with your kids; my kids enjoyed them on their own, the boys especially Branaugh’s Henry V when they were very young. The best intro is to attend good performances (eg. Spring Green, WI), but Branaugh's production are an easy intro or Marlon Brando’s Caesar: watch them. Then read them to and with your kids. The histories can be very fun, like the Henry IV series. But I must recommend (esp for kids) the Comedies and Romances (the latter are distinctly Catholic, eucatastrophes as Tolkien would say). Not Romeo and Juliet, not MSND, and I hate Macbeth (so dark, Malcolm must leave to learn from the Saint king and marries off set a saint wife irl): these aren’t for kids, and in R&J Shakespeare tears to pieces the idolatry of the false, in vogue, gnostic notion of love – a farcical but fair, just, true critique. My favorite is the Life of More which is only partly Shakespeare's. Shakespeare’s humor is much like “merry” More’s. Julius Caesar is good, but I can't recommend the commentary above: the Ignatius press editions have good intros for the most part (Andrew Moran on Hamlet is several notches above anything I’ve read); Anthony Esolen is helpful too, and Samuel Johnson. Digging in is best; discussion in reading groups can be helpful. HOMER in some ways is better than Shakespeare, but Ben Johnson is worth contemplating and rereading, for his judgement is right: “Soul of the age” AND “for ALL time” which can be said of no other but perhaps Dante. After these, BEOWULF (Serrailier's translation is good for kids since what he skips is above kids' level & the best for to chew and taste the grit of Old English); but Beowulf is a full notch below. CHAUCER, in Middle English, if you can: my favorite language. Thomas MORE’s writings, who is in my top five English writers: not Utopia, but Wegemer's "Sourcebook" I recommend. Perhaps the Song of Roland (Sayers) which is delightful, again a notch below. Shakespeare surpasses all. DANTE if you like him, but he is very challenging, also not in English. I'm a life long student and teacher, and have read many of these dozens of times: DEEP, slow at times, even word by word, but Shakespeare is so wide he encompasses all ages, and Dante eternity as well. Personally, I’m very interested in Curtius’ work above: that age is far too neglected and there are many “lesser” gems, a merrier forgotten time.
Philosophy. Aquinas. There are several good intros, but La Grange may be best (and Minerd has some recent translations). Of moderns, Josef Pieper's "Leisure" and C.S. Lewis "Abolition" (especially his third section, he makes mistakes in the first two) have helped me, as well as Klein's "Lectures and Essays." I don't recommend Plato or Aristotle unless you have twenty years, ancient Greek, and no duties. They were the “darkness” that could not grasp the “light.” GKC is fun but not a “great.” If you want to be challenged, Orestes Brownson is perhaps the greatest American thinker (except his political writings): these are again, easier and shorter essays (much online). Pieper, Klein, La Grange, Lewis are enough to give you a feel for philosophy. Few can (or should) devote their lives to it. And these are not light, but also nothing near Plato who leads one to know that nothing can be known, & he means nothing whatsoever at all. Not sure you want to go there. Again: “lux in tenebris lucet and tenebrae eam non comprehenderunt.” The ancient Greeks and their descendents were the very “wise” who found the cross “foolishness,” to whom the Father did not reveal the Truth as to “the little ones,” ignorant fishermen mostly. I don’t recommend too much philosophy, even Aquinas: most perish by that road, indeed almost every single last one, far more than I realized when I began 33 years ago what I was told a “safe” path. Just ain’t so. Much darkness, little light: and if you stare into the Abyss, it will stare back. As St. Paul and Revelation warn: do not come to know the “abyss of Satan”, one such road is “philosophy”, another hermeticism, gnosticism, or false mysticism which St. Paul wrote against in Galatians, and studying too deeply caused Clement of Alexandria to fall.
As to the rest, skip: if you want to conquer the world, Xenophon is perhaps the greatest strategist before Machiavelli: Leo Strauss will guide you through it. You’ll lose your soul but conquer the world.
For contemporary understanding, I’d recommend (as others) these three Encyclicals: Libertas Praestantissam, Pascendi Dominci Gregis (which is by far the most difficult encyclical), and Mirari Vos (which I’ve not read in ages but others recommend it). Solzhenitsyn's first volume of "Gulag" and his essay "Live not by Lies" are worth a read because of this very moment in history, but I didn’t fully appreciate the essay until my fourth or fifth reading; his short novel “One Day in the Life..” is a quick read. Dostoevky's "Brothers Karamozov" is also worthwhile to understand the times, but Hamlet is far deeper since he saw these times already 500 years ago and reveals better, deeper, wider the causes. Flannery O'Connor is perhaps the only “great” American writer. Her short stories are some very difficult, all worthwhile: dark with impish irony and much deep criticism of the fallen republic, while the Holy Spirit blows where it wills. But even she is secondary to the others and not as universal or profound. Shakespeare (being Catholic as well) contains all we need to know and he wrote in English. It's very difficult to penetrate, impossible to fully plumb, a great work like Homer in translation. We are blessed to have Shakespeare. More's a saint, learned, and again English. Klein I actually number near the greats: his book on math is perhaps the best on math of the last 500 to 2000 years, as well as the best guide to Plato. His lectures make you think. And he's far more ancient Greek than American, modern, or Jew. There are many exceedingly brilliant minds and philosophers who are assured to lead you to madness & perdition: Plato himself implicitly raises the question whether they are not all mad in his “Sophist,” himself foremost imo.
Budziewski above or the like is necessary reading for that we know not marriage or matrimony, but St Chrysostum (Homily 20 on Ephesians) answers the deeper challenges as to what it means to be a SIGN of Christ's union with the Church: his commentaries on Scripture are at New Advent. He was golden-tongued (lit. golden-mouthed) indeed and as pastor and homilist by many thought the greatest Church Father. He also thought Plato had a demon in his ear when he finally got around to cursorily reading him: he may not have been wrong. Complicated. And there’s nothing like his ancient commentaries on Scripture. So, I end where I began: the Church Fathers are underappreciated and deep and wide.
Thank you 🙏🏻
Smh where is cs Lewis ??
It's not meant to be exhaustive.
This is a great list.
+100 for Coriolanus.
Whenever I see a smart person's reading list and I've read several books in each section, I feel smart.
Hi Will,
Have you read much about evolution and how it has shaped the sexes/gender roles? (i.e. what Coroneus Phocas' introductory lectures were all about).
Very powerful stuff would love to dive in further
Yes, I can add a few books on that to the list as well.
By the way, thank you for putting this list together. The value- which is in getting the recommendations from a trusted source rather than a "100 best books etc." list- is huge.