Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The joy of reading books you don't understand

reactormag.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 263 posts

Re: The joy of reading books you don't understand

#241

Post by ryanjamurphy »

sfink wrote: post #53

This reminds me of something that I heard once from a Chinese teacher. I can't vouch for the accuracy of it, but he was definitely on to something : In the West, it is assumed that it is the speaker's job to make himself understood to his listeners. In the East, it is the other way around. In recent times, it seems like we've gotten even more extreme. The speaker or writer must not only spoon-feed the understanding,…

The important thing I take away from this comment is that before you choose what to read, it's crucial to be able to identify which readings contain the most useful and valuable takeaways that are worth the effort of reading them. It's true that modern mental models of reading and writing train us to only seek out the stuff that's easy to read, but the real problem is that there's so much to read that we have to prioritize, leading to a tendency to read the easy stuff because it's a guarantee you'll get something out of it. Then there's a sort-of market dynamic leading to the success of the easy stuff and the dismissal of the hard.

If that dynamic means that we miss out on the readings that are truly transformative, we've lost. So perhaps the strategic differentiator between readers is to actually have a really powerful theory of prioritization, and useful mechanisms to prioritize (such as the curated references of a good university course or a social network that shares only the most important resources, regardless of how difficult they are to understand).

Re: The joy of reading books you don't understand

#242

Post by lukan »

lmm wrote: post #222
lukan wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is also the alternative of treating humans as humans first, if you don't know much about them, except their looks and their passport nationality. And not assuming one has these and those traits, because they look "asian", but were raised in the US for example. I know I met many people from many backgrounds all over the world and my thinking in boxes default mode, was never really helpful, but often very wrong.…

> There is also the alternative of treating humans as humans first No there isn't, that's the same thing as just putting everyone in the "world" box. Which tends to boil down to just treating everyone like a member of your own culture (since most of the people from the world you've met are from your own culture), and ends up being worse.

"Which tends to boil down to just treating everyone like a member of your own culture "

Not at all. If you want it in programming language:

- there is a general human interface, a bit like you talk with people online (ideally like around here on HN)

- then there is the more specialized interface with your local countrymen

- and way more specialized, close friends, family - you can adress them in a way deeper interface

Or do you talk around here, like you talk with your peers around you? Would you know I am german, if I would not have disclosed it?

Re: The joy of reading books you don't understand

#243

Post by throwaway290 »

dmurray wrote: post #240
throwaway290 wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Made me check and Google translated it about the same. No unexpected comma or awkward driven into the woods (by whom?), punch is a punch (blow is more generic), but awkward duplication of "one". > I believe that one should only read books that bite and sting one. If the book we are reading does not wake us up with a punch to the head, why do we read the book? So that it makes us happy, as you write? My God, we would…

I liked the ChatGPT version better. The repeated "one" is paticularly jarring and not a stylistic feature of the original (which has man...einen , two different words reasonably translated as "one"). "Misfortune" is a more literal translation than "disaster", but in the context that it greatly hurts us, I prefer the latter. And I'm pretty sure "wir in Wälder vorstoßen würden" is closer to being cast out or driven awa…

Cast out vs going out into the woods can tip it over I suppose. Don't know German well enough myself to say but checking word by word it didn't have the being driven out vibe. But it's interesting that the difference is almost nonexistent.

Re: The joy of reading books you don't understand

#244

Post by troyvit »

You'll get my copy of The Integral Principles of the Structural Dynamics of Flow, by L.G. Claret, when you pry it out of my cold dead hands. I may never ram-chaw a partial chim set, but damned if I'm going to fear bolts, quams, squalcrats, or (especially) barms.

Re: The joy of reading books you don't understand

#245

Post by techostritch »

suoduandao3 wrote: post #239
techostritch wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t know if I’m taking Kafka too literally here, but the books that I read that bite and sting probably fall into two categories. Things that are cynically written in bad faith and things that are hopeless and callous. Torture porn bites and stings, reading hacky partisan politics bites and stings. Anything that makes me feel stupider after reading it bites and stings. The things that I think that he wants to say…

The one book I recall that 'bit and stung' as I think Kafka meant to say was 1984. How would you categorize that work? Torture porn?

Oh god no, that’s definitely in the cynically written in bad faith hacky partisan politics category. Maybe it just hasn’t aged well, but I couldn’t get through it.

Re: The joy of reading books you don't understand

#246

Post by ErigmolCt »

joaorico wrote: post #148

Kafka [1] on which types of book to read: "I believe one should only read those books which bite and sting. If the book we are reading does not wake us up with a blow to the head, then why read the book? To make us happy, as you write? My God, we would be just as happy if we had no books, and those books that make us happy, we could write ourselves if necessary. But we need the books that affect us like a disaster, t…

Truly impactful books should provoke deep emotional and intellectual responses

Re: The joy of reading books you don't understand

#247

Post by ErigmolCt »

techostritch wrote: post #190
joaorico wrote: post #148

Kafka [1] on which types of book to read: "I believe one should only read those books which bite and sting. If the book we are reading does not wake us up with a blow to the head, then why read the book? To make us happy, as you write? My God, we would be just as happy if we had no books, and those books that make us happy, we could write ourselves if necessary. But we need the books that affect us like a disaster, t…

I don’t know if I’m taking Kafka too literally here, but the books that I read that bite and sting probably fall into two categories. Things that are cynically written in bad faith and things that are hopeless and callous. Torture porn bites and stings, reading hacky partisan politics bites and stings. Anything that makes me feel stupider after reading it bites and stings. The things that I think that he wants to say…

I think he's referring to works that provoke profound thought and emotional engagement

Re: The joy of reading books you don't understand

#248

Post by ErigmolCt »

suoduandao3 wrote: post #239
techostritch wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t know if I’m taking Kafka too literally here, but the books that I read that bite and sting probably fall into two categories. Things that are cynically written in bad faith and things that are hopeless and callous. Torture porn bites and stings, reading hacky partisan politics bites and stings. Anything that makes me feel stupider after reading it bites and stings. The things that I think that he wants to say…

The one book I recall that 'bit and stung' as I think Kafka meant to say was 1984. How would you categorize that work? Torture porn?

"1984" is a quintessential example of literature that challenges and provokes, embodying Kafka’s idea of a book that serves as "the axe for the frozen sea inside us."

Re: The joy of reading books you don't understand

#250

Post by ErigmolCt »

djeastm wrote: post #225
lupusreal wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know anything about the man; what kind of life did Kafka have that happiness was easily had IRL and he needed books to experience misery?

Kafka's life abounded with misery. Great writer, though

I think it's important to understand Franz Kafka's life in context when discussing his experiences
Post reply on HN