Volume 4: John Milton

The Fourth Volume of the Harvard Classics is the Complete Poems of John Milton.

I've always had problems reading poetry. To me, poetry needs to be read aloud by someone who has a great voice (an actor, preferably.) I can read the words but it just doesn't click until I hear it. For me to read 400 pages of poetry without some help would be difficult.

The main attraction of the Fourth Volume is Paradise Lost. It wasn't until then that Milton really became a rockstar poet. Milton was also blind at the time, so it was even more of a feat.

So what's it about? The Fall of Man, according to the Bible. And this is where I truly hit the comprehension wall. I'm an atheist who sucks at reading poetry and Milton's brilliance adds another level of complexity on top of this. Ouch. Satan, by far, was my favorite. He had, as the kids would say, swag. He was an arrogant dick, but charming as hell - obviously.

I read Paradise Lost twice, and I'm still unable to explain it. I understood the plot. I understood Adam and Eve and temptation, but I couldn't come away with any great understanding or revelation regarding Paradise Lost. Obviously the work is brilliant and am glad I read it, but I just felt progressively stupider the more I tried to understand larger topics like themes throughout the poem and deeper meanings.

Paradise Regained covers the temptation of Christ, and was a poem trying to "reverse" the loss of Paradise in his first poem. More maddening of a read, and Milton's Samson Agonistes (about Samson from the Old Testament) made me feel even stupider. I lacked the biblical knowledge to understand the basic concepts. And perhaps I just wasn't in the right frame of mind to read Milton. It's not to say that Milton was horrible or that this shouldn't belong in the Harvard Classics - it's just that I wish I had help getting through this Volume.

And this is where my first issue was with the Harvard Classics came out: I needed an expert's guidance. Whether it's detailed footnotes or a scholar, I needed a hand. Perhaps when I finish this epic collection of books, I'll feel motivated to circle back and find a book on Milton from some major publisher that can walk me through his works without feeling like I've been throw in the deep end.

Next up? The complete poems of Ralph Waldo Emerson. I'm hoping it gets a lot easier.

Volume 3: Bacon, Milton and Browne, Part 2

The second part of Volume 3 of the Harvard Classics covers two works from John Milton and Sir Thomas Browne's Religio Medici.

The more I read Volume 3, the more I realized I've probably bitten off more than I can chew. John Milton's a difficult read. He's brilliant, but I just felt stupid reading him. But I progressed on, even though Volume 4 was Milton's poems. I figured if I got through that, then I'd be able to handle most things. Probably.

Areopagitica, Milton's first work, was his gauntlet being thrown down regarding licensing and censorship in publishing. Dissent was generally stifled by fees attached to publishing, so if you wanted to publish something you needed permission and money - which were both in short supply. Licensing was a product of the Inquisition, which helped the English Parliament (full of Protestants) pay attention to Milton's arguments because this was a way for them to give a big middle finger to the Catholics.

In an argument that mirrors internet censorship, Milton argued that a licensing order really won't stop scandalous and unapproved books. Information wanted to be free. Even if the information was "bad," we could still learn something from it (like a modern day Tom Friedman book!) And by licensing books, we're stifling learning. It was very libertarian.

Eventually Parliament gave in - 52 years alter.

Milton's Of Education was a letter regarding education (obviously), arguing for moving away from medieval education of grammar, rhetoric and dialectic. Instead, Milton wanted to increase the scope of learning - including things like arithmetic, geography, religion, politics and rhetoric and logic. Makes sense to me, but at the time it was controversial. Milton wanted to prepare students for changes of society. Made sense to me.

What I got out of Milton's works is that our current issues regarding publishing, censorship and education are nothing new, and Milton was one in a long line of advocates of free speech and education to better themselves personally as well as better the state. Good things to read, although, not terribly exciting.

Thomas Browne wrote Religio Medici shortly after becoming a physician, and is one of the first memoirs. It's a spiritual journey, diving deep into Christian virtues and veers into everything from mysticism to alchemy to astrology. It was a difficult read, mainly because every paragraph was a confession of his devotion as a Christian. I understand this, but it was just tough to read.

Three volumes finished, 48 more to go. What the hell did I get myself into?

Volume 3: Bacon, Milton and Browne, Part 1

The third volume of the Harvard Classics contains:

• Essays, Civil and Moral & The New Atlantis, by Francis Bacon
• Areopagitica & Tractate on Education, by John Milton
• Religio Medici, by Sir Thomas Browne

I vaguely remember the name Francis Bacon from some nerd camp I went to in elementary school, but that's pretty much it. For the same of the blog, I want to tackle him first.

Bacon was one of those rare learners and someone who couldn't quit learning or be satisfied with the results of learning. In college, he met Queen Elizabeth, and made his way up that ever slippery political ladder. He became a lawyer, then attorney general, and eventually after James I took over, finally made it to becoming Lord Chancellor. His fame didn't last long - he ended up in serious debt and his enemies went for the kill, resulting in a charge of 23 counts of corruption. After a large fine, a brief stint in the Tower of London and Bacon not being allowed to run for Parliament ever again, he spent his last few years in disgrace before he died at the age of 65.

How did he die? Well, he was studying the effects of freezing as a way to preserve meat and caught pneumonia. What did you expect from a scientist? His "Baconian Method" became what we know as the Scientific Method - inductive reasoning and building it from the ground up. This may seem like a no brainer, but at the time, science wasn't like that at all. The person who took up the Baconian Method and ran with it was Dr. Thomas Browne, who wrote Religio Medici (The Religion of a Doctor)

The first part of Bacon's contribution to the Harvard Classics was his essays - 59 of them covering everything from "Of Friendship" to "Of Travel." They really reminded me of Marcus Aurelius - words of wisdom with a gentle hand guiding you, nothing forceful. As an avid traveler, I paid the most attention to what he said. "Travel, in the younger sort, is a part of education, in the elder, a part of experience." The older I've gotten, the more the experiences matter instead of the checkboxes of things I've seen do.  But since Bacon spent a good portion of his adult life in politics, most of his essays cover topics like "Of Negotiating", "Of Seditions and Troubles" and "Of Honor and Reputation."

I liked the essays. I don't know if they qualify as groundbreaking in any way, but they were impressive and I'm glad I read them.

Bacon also wrote The New Atlantis, about a mythical island west of Peru that was a utopian paradise. Bacon, being religious, got to infuse this novel with a fair amount of background. Apparently the island converted to Christianity, and everyone lived in harmony. The university on the island lived out Bacon's ideals for pure and applied sciences. In a way it felt like this was the Star Trek universe - harmony, peace and the betterment of humanity via the sciences. Even though I felt that the book was a bit lame, it was pretty helpful in laying out this ideal system of government along with legal reform. Smarter people than I have argued that The New Atlantis was his utopian dream for North America and that his legal reform led to a contribution to the Napoleonic Code.

After a bit of reading, I gained respect for Bacon. Sure, he may have been either a pederast or a sodomite, but hey, who wasn't during that time? He died massively in debt, but his name is still remembered with reverence almost 400 years later with contributions that laid the groundwork for modern science and perhaps, some modern law.

Volume 2: Plato, Epictetus and Marcus Aurelius, Part 2

The second part of the second volume of the Harvard Classics involved two important pieces of Stoic philosophy, Epictetus' The Golden Sayings (or the Enchiridion) and Marcus Aurelius' Meditations.

The Stoic school of thought is basically the equivalent of The Dude in The Big Lebowski. I think it could be best described as accepting you can't control external actions, but only your reactions to them. For example, I can't control whether or not I'll get laid off at work, or other bad things, but I can control my reaction to them. For the Stoics, disturbing the soul was a grave sin. Shit, as it were, happens. You can sit there and cry and get stuck in pity or go "ok, so that event happened, let's move past it." I like it.

The Golden Sayings of Epictetus was a collection of handy phrases that were collected by one of his students. It's also referred to as the Enchiridion, or "ready at hand." It was a practical compilation and it made a lot of sense. I liked it. It's a good solid code to help. In fact, I was laid off my job in August of 2012. I took it better than I thought, mainly because of Epictetus' words.

Remember that you are an actor in a drama, of such a kind as the author pleases to make it. If short, of a short one; if long, of a long one. If it is his pleasure you should act a poor man, a cripple, a governor, or a private person, see that you act it naturally. For this is your business, to act well the character assigned you; to choose it is another's.

I was dealt a bad hand. It was my job to deal with it.

The more the words resounded to me, I decided to do some more research on Stoics and Epictetus himself. Epictetus was a slave with a bad leg, making him a cripple. But he found a way to deal with it, and took the lessons he learned from being smart and having the opportunity to study from another Stoic named Musonius Rufus (which would make a great name for a future child).

Another name came up - Admiral James Stockdale. For people who follow politics, he was Ross Perot's Vice Presidential pick in the 1992 campaign. He came across as an old man who required hearing aids, and wasn't as polished as Al Gore or Dan Quayle. And naturally, in this age of vindictive media, he was treated like a dottering old fool.

Stockdale spent over 7 years as a POW in Vietnam during the Vietnam War. He was the most senior pilot, which means he had the shit beaten out of him the most for information and propaganda purposes. Years of solitary confinement and more than a few broken bones at the hands of his captors. It would have broke a lot of better men than I. So how does a man survive that and walk out with his head held high? Epictetus' works. Stockdale knew going in that if he was shot down, there goes 5 years of his life. He was one of the most brilliant men to wear the uniform, and if a philosopher who died nearly 1900 years ago helped him survive, then there has to be valuable lessons. In fact, I highly recommend Stockdale's book Courage Under Fire: Testing Epictetus' Doctrines in a Laboratory of Human Behavior. It's a practical book written by a fighter pilot/philosopher. I can't recommend it enough. And after I read Courage Under Fire, I felt a sense of shame. I wish I knew about how amazing he was when he was alive, and could fully appreciate him better. His legacy deserves better than what people remember from 1992.

The final part of the second volume was Marcus Aurelius' Meditations. Marcus was a Roman Emperor, and a damn good one. He was raised well and well educated. He seemingly reluctantly took power and realized that being a good Stoic, that being Emperor was his duty, and thus, had to "play the part" to the best of his abilities.

While on a military campaign, Marcus started to write down notes to himself - reflections on a long military career, being a leader and a philosopher. They weren't intended for publication, so the style is a bit rough. But Marcus' words still hold meaning. He embraced death, realized life was a struggle and being and acting like a great man was more important than saying you had virtues. In a way, it was more of a valuable collection of lessons than Epictetus since it was "applied" philosophy. One quote from Meditations stands out:

“The happiness of your life depends upon the quality of your thoughts; therefore guard accordingly.”

The Stoic school appealed to me in a lot of ways, and I wish I had this "code" ingrained in me from an earlier age. Life could have been a lot different. It also made me realize that people (bloggers and others) who used quotes cherrypicked from Stoic philosophers without actually reading the texts were pretty irritating because they never read any of the texts. But I'm trying to be a good student of the Stoics, and not let that bother me because I can't control their lack of understanding. And being a good student of the Stoics isn't a destination you get to, but it's a continual process.
 

 

Volume 2: Plato, Epictetus and Marcus Aurelius, Part 1

The second volume of the Harvard Classics is broken up into 3 authors - Plato, Epictetus and Marcus Aurelius. Plato's work includes the three essays: The Apology, Phaedo and Crito. I'll get to Epictetus and Marcus Aurelius in my next post, but I don't know much about the authors in this volume. Yes, I've heard of Plato, but other than him coming after Socrates in chronological order I didn't know much. I had never heard of Epictetus until that point, but after this volume, he became my new friend. And as for Marcus Aurelius - I didn't know much about him other than he was a Roman Emperor (Thanks Sid Meier!)

Plato's The Apology is his version of Socrates defense speech after he was charged with "corrupting the young." The Apology is from the word apologia, which is to speak in defense of a position or cause. Kids today would say "sorry not sorry", but this was infinitely more eloquent. The Apology covers the trial, from accusation to cross-examination in his defense. It was hard for me to read so I had to go back over passages multiple times. And I tried to keep in mind that Plato was writing very lovingly about his former mentor/hero so I'm sure there was a big degree of idolization. What I got out of The Apology was that Socrates knew, I think, that he was going to be put to death because the jury had presupposed his guilt. It was his final stand.

The next dialogue from Plato was the Phaedo, set the day before Socrates was going to be put to death. Phaedo was the name of one of Socrates' students, who was supposedly with Socrates while he was on his death bed. I vaguely understood what was going on and was kicking myself for not taking enough philosophy in college, or at least understanding what the hell I was reading. I was miffed at myself because if this was how I was going to feel a few times per each volume, this was going to be a torturous exercise. With a little help from outside resources, it now made sense. Socrates' main point was his belief in the immortality of the soul. Now things started to make sense. Not that I fully understood what was going on, but could at least have an idea of what the hell I was reading!

I don't know about immortality of the soul, but here, 2400 years later, we still read and discuss the man and his work. That's as close as immortality as you can get - I would think.

Crito was the third and final dialogue by Plato, and chronologically within Plato's dialogues, it actually comes after Phaedo despite this being set in prison before Socrates was on his deathbed. Crito was Socrates' good friend, and told Socrates that tomorrow he'll be executed, and he had means to break Socrates out of prison and finance his means of escape. After all, what sort of good rich friend would Crito be if he didn't offer to break out his friend?

Socrates response was that despite him having a massive injustice done to him, it wasn't good to do a further injustice by escaping from prison. My response to this was that Socrates was choosing martyrdom instead of a virtually effortless escape, and was a bit pissed at Socrates for "being a dick." Crito had the means to get him out of Dodge, as it were, and all it would have taken is a "yes" and he wouldn't have died. But he was in his late 60s, so perhaps he realized that it was better to go out as a martyr than a fugitive. Socrates discussed the "contract" that he had with Athens - he lived there, raised children, etc - and thus, he entered into an implied contract with the city since he had reaped the benefits of living in Athens. Athens was the parent, and Socrates was the child and had to take his punishment. Still, I was conflicted.

Next up: Epictetus and Marcus Aurelius.


 

Volume 1: Benjamin Franklin, John Woolman and William Penn #2

The bulk of Volume 1 talked about John Woolman and William Penn, both Quakers. The only thing I knew about Quakers is a) that they're sometimes referred to as "Society of Friends" (which I rather like) and b) they're dedicated to social betterment and pacifism. I'm not a religious person at all, but I can respect this.

The Journal of John Woolman was fascinating. It was a social justice text, advocating abolition and wanting equality for all. Like Ben Franklin's Autobiography, it seemed to lack an ego, but instead, discussed becoming a better person - spiritually and morally. Perhaps this was a theme in Volume 1: great men through force of will and intellect wanting to improve the world.

One of the stories that stuck with me is how, when a young man working as a clerk, Woolman had to write a bill of sale for a slave. This event sickened him and he became a crusader against one of the worst wrongs in the New World. I didn't realize that some (a few) Quakers were slaveholders themselves, and that quite rightly upset Woolman and he helped push against slavery over 100 years before a war almost destroyed the United States over the issue.

The Journal was the first of many books in the Harvard Classics that I felt a sense of shame over. I'm in my 30s and just *now* heard of John Woolman? I felt like I screwed up somewhere in my journey of education. Despite being an atheist, Woolman's work was powerful to me. I later learned that the Journal has been continually published since 1774, only behind the Bible. What a great man I wish I had learned about in my formative years.

William Penn is an interesting guy. I knew he was the namesake of the state of Pennsylvania and was one of the first people calling for unification of the colonies. But that's about it. I also learned he's not the Quaker Oats logo. His Fruits of Solitude was a collection of sayings and maxims, about everything from marriage to friendship to being a better person in the Quaker way. Compared to Woolman's Journal, Fruits of Solitude was easier to read and remember and could reach a wider audience like Franklin's Poor Richard's Almanac.

Penn himself had laid the groundwork for a lot of what we should be thankful for. Those controversial rights we have like freedom of religion and trial by jury? Thank Penn for that. Unfortunately, Penn died broke in England, despite having left behind a state where Quakers could thrive in the Colonies. Like most good men, they got taken advantage of by business partners. I felt bad reading that after finishing Fruits of Solitude. He was an idealist, and one of the best our country has had.

Volume 1: Benjamin Franklin, John Woolman and William Penn #1

Now, I'd like to think of myself as a fairly educated person, but that's all gone now. I spent my adult life learning science, engineering and technology. So it was time to go back to school and learn.

The first volume of the Harvard Classics contains three books: The Autobiography of Benjamin Franklin, the Journal of John Woolman and Fruits of Solitude by William Penn. Before I got started with this first volume, I had no idea who John Woolman was. I knew the name William Penn but admittedly knew next to nothing about him. Benjamin Franklin, on the otherhand... who doesn't know about Ben Franklin?

 

You would think that a man as legendary as Benjamin Franklin would write an autobiography talking about how great he was. After all, he is an amazing man: statesman, politician, writer, inventor, ladies' man - you name it. Look up the word polymath and you'll see the definition as "wanting to be 1% as amazing as Ben Franklin." So for Franklin in his own autobiography to talk about how great he was wouldn't be bragging, just a statement of fact. But there wasn't. There wasn't a trace of bravado or ego that I could detect. The autobiography starts with his childhood, and his fondness of swimming and reading. Eventually he learns the trade of being a printer in Boston from his brother and starts to write, eventually becoming a star. His jealous brother, James, shafts Ben, and over the course of a few years, forces Ben to look for a job in New York, then Philadelphia.

From there, Franklin eventually starts a newspaper and attracts the attention of politicians for his intellect and hard work. In between writing Poor Richard's Almanac, religious pamphlets, building the first public library and inventing, Ben Franklin still had time to advise elected officials who came to him for advice. To politicians, his advice and proposals were pure gold. And we haven't even got close to discussing the Revolutionary War and his part in it. I know, I'm cutting it short, but if all of the works of the Harvard Classics were as awesome as this, then I was going to be in for an amazing reward.

Sure, you can find faults for this book. It was written over a span of nearly 20 years, so there are gaps in logic, narrative and coherence. The Autobiography lacks anything on the Revolution, which is a real downer. Some commenters said that there was a tone of arrogance and condescension, but I didn't see it. And if I did, I let it go by virtue of his contributions.

So what did I learn from his autobiography? Hard work, being humble and owning up to mistakes will take you far in life. He didn't come from a rich family and climbed his way up to becoming one of the greatest Americans ever. But why include this in the Harvard Classics? My guess is that as a historical record, it's necessary to read in order to understand what it was like in the colonies before the drums of war started to beat loudly. It was the first and major autobiographies in the English language, which wasn't a genre at that point. And a few volumes later, it hit me that a reason why this was included was to say to readers of the Harvard Classics: "Look at what this man did through self-improvement" - after all, 100 years ago, people started to read this collection to better themselves. Perhaps it was a wish of Dr. Charles Eliot to give common men and women the means to obtain a Harvard education to make better people of us all.

Next up: John Woolman and William Penn.

Getting Started

About 4 years ago, I decided that I'd embark upon reading the Harvard Classics, a 51 volume set of books compiled in the early 1900's designed to give the reader a "liberal education." Also called the Five Foot Shelf of Books, Dr. Eliot put serious work in putting together this compendium and deserves a vast amount of credit in developing this and allowing dissemination of knowledge to anyone who would could afford it. As I close in on finishing the massive series of books, I decided that I'd blog about it.

I'm almost finished reading every single page of the Harvard Classics, including the 20 volume set of the Harvard Classics Shelf of Fiction. There are reading guides out there that allow you to read 15 minutes a day and in retrospect, perhaps I would have done better if I read that instead. And after reading a few of the volumes, I've been left scratching my head and indulging in late night research sessions wondering "What the hell did I just read?"

Certainly I'm richer for having read these books, and I don't regret it for a bit, but a lot of questions have come up. Does this collection of books still hold value for those pursing a liberal education? If there was an updated version of the Five Foot Shelf of Books, what would be added or removed? Are the texts enough, or do they need explanations as well?

I'm not an academic, but I figured that I should at least write notes down regarding each volume of the collection and see where it leads.

A few thing as I get started: I read these books over the course of four years. For me to recall everything is impossible, therefore any errors in my recollection are entirely my fault. As I write this blog, I'll go back and look up what I read and try to summarize it with attributions as I go along. For any misattributions, I wholeheartedly apologize. They are inadvertent. I also apologize for any accidental swearing in any blog post. And if there's any question about the accuracy of what I wrote, I'm probably wrong.