It reminds me of Thucydides on “The society that separates its scholars from its warriors will have its thinking done by cowards and its fighting by fools.”
We now have our thinking done by cowards who have lived not, but who instead think they can think while living inside a pretty classroom.
They have commandeered “empathy” in their morally superior umbrella and claim it a part of intellectualism. Slap an empathetic scratch n sniff on it, and now they know what a soldier feels like. PTSD from a faulty vending machine doesn't measure up though. Educated warriors are far more effective
I agree with most of this. However reading fiction can easily be more fun than Netflix though. Because, since books are cheap, books don’t get designed by committee and can actually say something different than the technocratic blob.
I came here to say this. Also, written fiction isn't constrained by budget like with movies and tv programs, so the author can include whatever visuals he can describe without worrying about running out of money for sets or special effects.
The amount of entertainment has increased a gazillionfold but the quality has dropped. In the 60s, there was somewhere between three and eight channels and yet shows were made that people still watch and love (late last year, someone did the tallying and found out that Gunsmoke has more streaming watch minutes than anything Disney+ has put out.) So old pulps, old adventure novels, just old novels in general, will probably provide more entertainment then 90% of what's new today...IF people have the patience to sit down and actually try it.
There are still modern historians worth reading. Victor Davis Hanson is one. It just takes time finding them and they're not common.
Utter, soul-crushing, truth. Any fiction books written today, maybe any books at all, are likely written with the hope of getting picked up by Netflix for a series deal. I did not think this way 15 years ago when I wrote much more than today, I imagine today that goal is always at the back of an author's mind, whether we like it or admit to it or not.
I generally agree with this, unfortunately I’m still struggling to find Thucydides’s treatise on IJN carrier design, and how poor elevator placement constrained flight operations and created fire hazards that together proved decisive at Midway.
While there is great merit in much of what you say, such as that about Mary Beard, of which I have likewise dismantled the authority of many history professors with their tunnel-visioned bias in my own books, I will say that some authors today do have what it takes to research and analyze numerous old texts from different perspectives to add valuable insight. But this insight doesn't come from reading a few books, but rather hundreds. And that most tasks in life are best done in youth, when it comes to writing, greater age brings wisdom, as life experiences have a huge role to play.
Moreover, as we know, there are always two sides to every story, and just because one view won over the masses over time doesn't mean it's the truth. Case in point, the masses believed the world was flat for thousands of years until Pythagoras posited that it was round. And even once believed as round, it was deemed the center of the universe for thousands of additional years until Copernicus resurrected the silenced voices of the past, only to fuel Galileo to defy the Church to prove that the Earth revolves around the sun. These scientific studies could not be experienced by flying into space, being technologies that didn't exist back then, but could only have been done by the power of the human will to use logic and the visionary abilities of imagination. For as even Einstein said, "imagination is more important than knowledge."
On a final note, while I agree that the majority of books being published these days is inundated with fluff, "A Blazing Gilded Age" is a historical novel currently being introduced into history classes because of two main reasons. First, it captures the era by bringing together various iconic figures in lieu of having High School and college kids read numerous biographies, each separate and isolated from the broad sweeping story. And second, the family saga of fictional characters not only interacting with these great figures, but also dealing with child labor, class warfare, draconian laws that hamstrung them and intentionally shackled them in poverty, all merge to create a full and real-world-environment of the past, one burdened with immense struggle and emotional toil that one does not truly grasp or feel from reading nonfiction alone. Hence, while personal experience is the best foundation for writing books, there are those who have both the knowledge and creative vision to offer great value to readers seeking enlightenment and inspiration.
I agree with your rule but note that every rule has an exception. My book, Henry Scott, Third Duke of Buccleuch, is an important true story in history but written as an entertaining novel. Henry Scott's tutor was the famous Scottish philosopher, Adam Smith. I had to self-publish (available on Amazon) because you are right about the current state of book publishing.
You make a lot of great points, academics definitely tend to have the same opinions about everything and modern books can fall flat (there are exceptions). However a lot of the people from antiquity that you mention weren’t historians, they were interesting people who wrote memoirs. That’s great but it’s not the same as reading a history book (though even actual historians back then, like Polybius, did lead more interesting lives)
Great points and brilliantly said! I still have a handful of classics like “Catcher in the Rye” that pass the authenticity test. I cannot think of any fictional books published post 1980 that would be worthwhile.
Re: HISTORIANS WARRIORS AND THE HUMAN CONDITION: I thought, perhaps naively, that real historians wrote to record truth, abolish propaganda and lies, and rarely, but humbly, offer a balanced analytical view of events. There are no doubt many who in life, bravely or stupidly do without any thought (luckily they don't often write about it),but there are still more that lie loudly or shamelessly pontificate, unburdened by even a smattering of knowledge, less still experience. Our era of 1 minute Tik-Tok videos is emblematic of the current worldwide genre and generation that breathes in vibes and exults in memes, leaving naught to imagination or contemplation, and cares not a fig what is true, what has value, or what endures. 'Tis said Experientia magistra stultorum. But fools are not easily taught. Doing the same thing wrong a multitude of times and recurrently experiencing the result, is the price fools pay to be educated. It was ever thus between those congenitally destined to be either cogniscenti or ignorati.
A good place to start not reading is this dreadful article. You just stack two ridiculous premises on top of each other to form the basis of your argument, which is total nonsense. Tons of people read for entertainment and we are in a golden age of new books. Telling people to not engage with it is evil
What an absolutely retarded poast. There are plenty of good things coming out all the time, the failure to find them is on the reader. Just because "NYT Bestseller" is worthless now, doesn't mean Gallimard or Routledge are no longer a seal of quality, for instance
Somewhat of a facile point considering the incredible inequality when it came to literacy much less authorship. Interesting that your one example of modern groupthink was a woman while all of the examples of genius and differentiated thinking were men and that too in the Ancient West.
While I agree that travel does less to expand our cultural viewpoints than it did even 10-15 years ago due to the hegemony of American pop culture and its spread through social media, it is simply not true that someone living in NYC versus someone living in Iran, Gaza, Russia, India would all have the same viewpoint.
Of course with more literacy comes more bad literature. I think the point you are trying to make is not that we as humans have become less interesting but that the path to gain a published platform is rote, flattening literature that does make it through to the consuming public. In which case, I agree wholeheartedly.
There's only about a dozen books published after 1800 that are worth reading.
Another excellent article!
Will you list those books?
Good stuff!
It reminds me of Thucydides on “The society that separates its scholars from its warriors will have its thinking done by cowards and its fighting by fools.”
We now have our thinking done by cowards who have lived not, but who instead think they can think while living inside a pretty classroom.
They have commandeered “empathy” in their morally superior umbrella and claim it a part of intellectualism. Slap an empathetic scratch n sniff on it, and now they know what a soldier feels like. PTSD from a faulty vending machine doesn't measure up though. Educated warriors are far more effective
I agree with most of this. However reading fiction can easily be more fun than Netflix though. Because, since books are cheap, books don’t get designed by committee and can actually say something different than the technocratic blob.
I came here to say this. Also, written fiction isn't constrained by budget like with movies and tv programs, so the author can include whatever visuals he can describe without worrying about running out of money for sets or special effects.
Agree for the most part. Two very minor quibbles.
The amount of entertainment has increased a gazillionfold but the quality has dropped. In the 60s, there was somewhere between three and eight channels and yet shows were made that people still watch and love (late last year, someone did the tallying and found out that Gunsmoke has more streaming watch minutes than anything Disney+ has put out.) So old pulps, old adventure novels, just old novels in general, will probably provide more entertainment then 90% of what's new today...IF people have the patience to sit down and actually try it.
There are still modern historians worth reading. Victor Davis Hanson is one. It just takes time finding them and they're not common.
Utter, soul-crushing, truth. Any fiction books written today, maybe any books at all, are likely written with the hope of getting picked up by Netflix for a series deal. I did not think this way 15 years ago when I wrote much more than today, I imagine today that goal is always at the back of an author's mind, whether we like it or admit to it or not.
I generally agree with this, unfortunately I’m still struggling to find Thucydides’s treatise on IJN carrier design, and how poor elevator placement constrained flight operations and created fire hazards that together proved decisive at Midway.
OK, now you've got me curious. What is the book that you're alluding to?
Shattered Sword by Tully and Parshall, tackles a bunch of historical myths
While there is great merit in much of what you say, such as that about Mary Beard, of which I have likewise dismantled the authority of many history professors with their tunnel-visioned bias in my own books, I will say that some authors today do have what it takes to research and analyze numerous old texts from different perspectives to add valuable insight. But this insight doesn't come from reading a few books, but rather hundreds. And that most tasks in life are best done in youth, when it comes to writing, greater age brings wisdom, as life experiences have a huge role to play.
Moreover, as we know, there are always two sides to every story, and just because one view won over the masses over time doesn't mean it's the truth. Case in point, the masses believed the world was flat for thousands of years until Pythagoras posited that it was round. And even once believed as round, it was deemed the center of the universe for thousands of additional years until Copernicus resurrected the silenced voices of the past, only to fuel Galileo to defy the Church to prove that the Earth revolves around the sun. These scientific studies could not be experienced by flying into space, being technologies that didn't exist back then, but could only have been done by the power of the human will to use logic and the visionary abilities of imagination. For as even Einstein said, "imagination is more important than knowledge."
On a final note, while I agree that the majority of books being published these days is inundated with fluff, "A Blazing Gilded Age" is a historical novel currently being introduced into history classes because of two main reasons. First, it captures the era by bringing together various iconic figures in lieu of having High School and college kids read numerous biographies, each separate and isolated from the broad sweeping story. And second, the family saga of fictional characters not only interacting with these great figures, but also dealing with child labor, class warfare, draconian laws that hamstrung them and intentionally shackled them in poverty, all merge to create a full and real-world-environment of the past, one burdened with immense struggle and emotional toil that one does not truly grasp or feel from reading nonfiction alone. Hence, while personal experience is the best foundation for writing books, there are those who have both the knowledge and creative vision to offer great value to readers seeking enlightenment and inspiration.
DAMN.
I do need to limit my Twitter time, and I need to find a translation of Xenophon post haste.
same... what a fucking legend
Lovely writing. I love when the personality of writer comes out in their writing.
I agree with your rule but note that every rule has an exception. My book, Henry Scott, Third Duke of Buccleuch, is an important true story in history but written as an entertaining novel. Henry Scott's tutor was the famous Scottish philosopher, Adam Smith. I had to self-publish (available on Amazon) because you are right about the current state of book publishing.
You make a lot of great points, academics definitely tend to have the same opinions about everything and modern books can fall flat (there are exceptions). However a lot of the people from antiquity that you mention weren’t historians, they were interesting people who wrote memoirs. That’s great but it’s not the same as reading a history book (though even actual historians back then, like Polybius, did lead more interesting lives)
Great points and brilliantly said! I still have a handful of classics like “Catcher in the Rye” that pass the authenticity test. I cannot think of any fictional books published post 1980 that would be worthwhile.
Re: HISTORIANS WARRIORS AND THE HUMAN CONDITION: I thought, perhaps naively, that real historians wrote to record truth, abolish propaganda and lies, and rarely, but humbly, offer a balanced analytical view of events. There are no doubt many who in life, bravely or stupidly do without any thought (luckily they don't often write about it),but there are still more that lie loudly or shamelessly pontificate, unburdened by even a smattering of knowledge, less still experience. Our era of 1 minute Tik-Tok videos is emblematic of the current worldwide genre and generation that breathes in vibes and exults in memes, leaving naught to imagination or contemplation, and cares not a fig what is true, what has value, or what endures. 'Tis said Experientia magistra stultorum. But fools are not easily taught. Doing the same thing wrong a multitude of times and recurrently experiencing the result, is the price fools pay to be educated. It was ever thus between those congenitally destined to be either cogniscenti or ignorati.
A good place to start not reading is this dreadful article. You just stack two ridiculous premises on top of each other to form the basis of your argument, which is total nonsense. Tons of people read for entertainment and we are in a golden age of new books. Telling people to not engage with it is evil
What an absolutely retarded poast. There are plenty of good things coming out all the time, the failure to find them is on the reader. Just because "NYT Bestseller" is worthless now, doesn't mean Gallimard or Routledge are no longer a seal of quality, for instance
Somewhat of a facile point considering the incredible inequality when it came to literacy much less authorship. Interesting that your one example of modern groupthink was a woman while all of the examples of genius and differentiated thinking were men and that too in the Ancient West.
While I agree that travel does less to expand our cultural viewpoints than it did even 10-15 years ago due to the hegemony of American pop culture and its spread through social media, it is simply not true that someone living in NYC versus someone living in Iran, Gaza, Russia, India would all have the same viewpoint.
Of course with more literacy comes more bad literature. I think the point you are trying to make is not that we as humans have become less interesting but that the path to gain a published platform is rote, flattening literature that does make it through to the consuming public. In which case, I agree wholeheartedly.