Welcome to Detroit Sports Forum!

By joining our community, you'll be able to connect with fellow fans that live and breathe Detroit sports just like you!

Get Started
  • If you are no longer able to access your account since our recent switch from vBulletin to XenForo, you may need to reset your password via email. If you no longer have access to the email attached to your account, please fill out our contact form and we will assist you ASAP. Thanks for your continued support of DSF.

How many have you read?

1984 and War and Peace (not in the top ten, but mentioned earlier in the article).

I might have read either Les Miserables and/or A Tale of Two Cities back in jr high, but if I did I remember very little of them.
 
Aside from the incoherent right-wing babbling by the author of the article, I have read: 1984, Moby Dick, Atlas Shrugged, A Tale of Two Cities, and The Art of War. Though the Art of War is different depending on who does the translations/interpretations.
 
1984, and Moby dick... tried some of the others I own some of them... can't say I have read them through though...
I mean none of these are as good as 'Blood Meridian' :)
 
Last edited:
Aside from the incoherent right-wing babbling by the author of the article...

He did ramble a lot. He could've just said this:

People often claim to have read books that they actually have not, and I like to think mainly liberals do this. Liberals like Neil deGrasse Tyson, who was asked to make a book list and only gave short summaries of the books he recommended, leading me to conclude that he did not read them. Confusingly, by attacking liberals who do not read, you may think I am advocating reading, but I am not. I consider reading long books to be abnormal. That being said, there are some books that I think "people" - by which I mean Conservatives like me - would be embarrassed to admit they have not read, and here are the top ten, even though #8 contains two books, and a reference to an entire category of literature.
"

I read 2, 3, & 7.

This is simply not true:
9. On the Origin of Species, Charles Darwin: Many pro-evolutionists online display no understanding that the pro-evolution scientific community rejects the bulk of Darwin?s initial findings about evolution.
It's cute when Conservatives try to be intellectual, but I thought reading was for wimps... not real men like Dick Cheney and George W. Bush.
 
3,7,8a, and 10.

Art of War is quick and really all I remember is that battle flows like water from the high to the low places.

1984 led to Anthem led to Atlas Shrugged, more or less. I read Fahrenheit 451 somewhere in there too. I still don't get how people read these books and take a side rather than look to reach the right balance between competing ideas.

That line about #9 is just dumb. I'm not sure it makes sense to read the Origin of Species unless you are an actual biologist familiar with a great deal of the literature or if there's a highly annotated version out there that fills you in on what parts played what role in the development of the field. Learning a subject by going through it's history and reading edited selections with extensive commentary is a great way, maybe the best way to learn a subject. But you miss a lot if you just read original texts without commentary or context. Same probably goes for #5.

#1. Got that right. I downloaded the free ebook, but never read it.
 
Last edited:
Can we add Three and Out to the board version of this list?
 
What competing ideas were there in 1984? And how would you balance them?
 
What competing ideas were there in 1984? And how would you balance them?

It's not that one book contains competing ideas, it's the set of the fictional dystopian futures each highlighting what's wrong if you go too far in any one direction. Although, I'm not sure what the go-to books are to set against Atlas Shrugged and 1984...the other side is better represented in movies. Soylent Green, Alien, Robocop...maybe Hunger Games counts. Haven't read it.
 
... Although, I'm not sure what the go-to books are to set against Atlas Shrugged and 1984...

ones that attempt to justify curtailing civil rights and oppression?

usually they're magazines, leaflets, posters, news reports, etc. not books:

why-they-hate-us.jpg


But some are books...

images


TheBellCurve.gif


Timeimmemorial.jpeg
 
ones that attempt to justify curtailing civil rights and oppression?

Curtailing civil rights and oppression are the repercussions in the story used to warn of the dangers of too much adherence to the idealisms. In 1984 it's socialism, Atlas Shrugged, 'collectivism', all those movies I mentioned involve runaway capitalism. You can add Bioshock to that list, which is a rebuke to Atlas Shrugged. Great game.

Maybe I'm not understanding what you're trying to say. You think the point of 1984 and Atlas Shugged is that "curtailing civil rights and oppression" are bad? Or are you saying something else?
 
Last edited:
I think you should've said "competing interests" in regards to 1984, not competing ideas. Orwell doesn't really present "living under an oppressive totalitarian govt" as a choice for a reasonable person to make.
 
Shrugged, '84, Two Cities, Democracy in America, The Prince and Moby Dick. In my "Randian" phase I read pretty much all of her books, fiction and non.
 
On some level, the opposite of 1984 could be A Brave New World....

1984: sexuality and reproduction controlled and oppressed, everyone controlled and watched through government program, constant cold war with another power

BNW: sexuality and reproduction controlled through genetic manipulation and programing from childhood, yet sexuality expressed wildly; everyone controlled via caste system based upon genetics and programming from childhood; no mention of opposing power, only outcasts living in poor conditions.

Two opposing visions of how technology and social evolution could lead to totalitarian governments... it's just that 1984 was in your face and BNW was much more subtle. Both futures were terrifying in their own way. 1984 runaway fascism and BNW runaway... eugenics/extreme liberalism gone wrong?
 
On some level, the opposite of 1984 could be A Brave New World....

1984: sexuality and reproduction controlled and oppressed, everyone controlled and watched through government program, constant cold war with another power

BNW: sexuality and reproduction controlled through genetic manipulation and programing from childhood, yet sexuality expressed wildly; everyone controlled via caste system based upon genetics and programming from childhood; no mention of opposing power, only outcasts living in poor conditions.

Two opposing visions of how technology and social evolution could lead to totalitarian governments... it's just that 1984 was in your face and BNW was much more subtle. Both futures were terrifying in their own way. 1984 runaway fascism and BNW runaway... eugenics/extreme liberalism gone wrong?

I did enjoy that book. High School I think.
 
On some level, the opposite of 1984 could be A Brave New World....

1984: sexuality and reproduction controlled and oppressed, everyone controlled and watched through government program, constant cold war with another power

BNW: sexuality and reproduction controlled through genetic manipulation and programing from childhood, yet sexuality expressed wildly; everyone controlled via caste system based upon genetics and programming from childhood; no mention of opposing power, only outcasts living in poor conditions.

Two opposing visions of how technology and social evolution could lead to totalitarian governments... it's just that 1984 was in your face and BNW was much more subtle. Both futures were terrifying in their own way. 1984 runaway fascism and BNW runaway... eugenics/extreme liberalism gone wrong?

BNW did have the accommodating island for free thinkers where they could go so as not to disturb the established order. I read it a while ago, but I don't remember it being a harsh punishment; more like a quarantine.

you can see a bit of the methods of both books used to control society in real life.
 
Back
Top