Volume 6: Poems and Songs, by Robert Burns

Volume 6 contains the complete Poems and Songs by Robert Burns.

All 557 of them.

Robert Burns was "the guy" who wrote that often sung song Auld Lang Syne, which I know of the first line and them mumble the rest, generally while drinking heavily (because it's New Year's Eve, obviously.) He was Scottish and their national poet. However, between my inability to read poetry and understand it and my inclination to pronounce everything with a bad Scottish accent as I mentally read it, I needed a mental break because there's no way I'm going to get through this without totally butchering the guy's works, memories and offend Scotland in the process. And if any book in the series was going to make me throw in the towel, this came close.

Since reading his poems didn't make sense to me, I looked on Youtube for videos of people reciting his poems. I figured that it's one thing to read his words, but another to actually understand them being said. Turns out the BBC had a done a series of videos of his works by famous Scottish actors (like David Tennant for one) so I got excited and figured yay, my next few hours! and clicked on the links. Turns out they were meant for UK audiences, and I was geographically restricted and unable to watch the videos. Damnit.

Robert Burns is the national poet of Scotland, and thus, his poetry reflects the hard nature of Scottish life. He took traditional folk songs and crafted them in his own unique way. For me, his poetry was pretty decent, but required a decent amount of re-reading to understand what it is I was reading. I liked it, but didn't see why adulation was warranted. And for the first time in this Harvard Classics, I looked at body of literature that's hundreds of years old and went, ok, I don't get why this is that awesome.

Perhaps it's the cultural influence. Even today, Burns Clubs still exist as a way of celebrating Burns and all things Scotland. Burns wrote a poem "Address to a Haggis" and they celebrate it by eating it and reciting the poem, which is a bit confusing to me because I think haggis is horrible. But then again, I drink Jeppson's Malort. We all need to hit rock bottom, as it were.

So even thought I liked but didn't love Burns, I can appreciate his cultural influence even if I don't get it.

 

Volume 5: Essays and English Traits, by Ralph Waldo Emerson

I don't think I knew much about Ralph Waldo Emerson. I certainly didn't read anything of his prior to Volume 5, and honestly - I got him confused with Walt Whitman a lot. I knew he was a poet and a philosopher but that was it.

The Volume itself is broken up into two parts: the first is his essays - 18 of them. The second is English Traits - a series of essays about a trip to England. It's not exactly a travelogue, but reflections.

What struck me about the essays is that Emerson conveyed a subdued intelligence with a lot of introspection. You can tell he was overly educated (went to Harvard, naturally) and yet not a fan of the rigid confines of intellectualism. Part of his infamous The American Scholar essay involved this "Man Thinking" concept whereby you quit parroting the thinking of others and think for yourself. And by thinking for yourself, you'd be able to broaden your mind and understanding of the world. In a way, we look at this and go "well, obviously..." but still repeat what we hear from other supposed intellectuals in an effort to sound intellectual.

Emerson was also part of the Transcendental Club, a group of young intellectuals who got together to discuss literary and philosophical topics. This was when people actually had things like debate societies and clubs where they'd get together and talk about ideas versus things like reality TV and popular culture. And it was also a middle finger to Harvard as well. Sure, they may have taught students facts but they didn't teach them how to think. And like any Club, they naturally had to publish their own short-lived literary journal. Nowadays they'd just start a blog, but in the late 1830s, they didn't have to contend with the idiocy of Facebook commenters mocking them.

During this time he was giving lectures, and gave a commencement address at Harvard's Divinity School (now called the Divinity School Address) and managed to piss off the school so much by proclaming that Jesus was awesome but he wasn't God that he wasn't invited back for 30 years. Granted, it's what I believe too but c'mon son - you went and gave a commencement speech at a freakin' Divinity School. What did you expect would happen?

Emerson's writings made him the great intellectual hero of the mid 1800s. What I liked was that a) I agreed with him and b) his writings were well-spoken and easily accessible. Most works by "public intellectuals" aren't because they try to convince you that they're an intellectual (it's like that Margaret Thatcher quote about "power is like being a lady - if you have to tell people you are, you aren't.") And in a way, Emerson being thought of as an intellectual idol means people who have studied him repeat his words and thus, becoming the thing he wrote against: intellectual parrots. DAMN YOU FULL CIRCLES!

Emerson wrote in his essay on Self-Reliance that "Man is timid and apologetic; he is no longer upright; he dares not say 'I think,' 'I am,' but quotes some saint or sage." The takeaway is think for yourself, and perhaps that when I finish this set of books I'm able to do that, despite the weight of knowledge I've accumulated.

(oh and I know that by quoting a quote about quoting makes me look like a fool, but...)

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.