Abstracts

[linthornhill]

Years ago, one of the facets of my job at Global Entertainment Company was to abstract contracts. It was something I thoroughly enjoyed. In fact, it's very much the way I do research. I scour books for the information I need, skimming over text (thank you, seventh grade speed reading class,) and hunting and gathering choice tidbits I can mold to

Comments

[somigliana]

Heee. I really do like that icon. Chuckles.

I know I'm going to sound terribly under-read, but Nabokov is the author of Lolita, wasn't he?

[linthornhill]

Isn't it a great icon. I absolutely love the quote.

He is the author of Lolita. I had given him wide birth considering the content of the story, but on a whim, I picked it up one day. Nabokov's prose is really exquisite, and he manages to show Humbert Humbert a slave to his own lost love. Lolita is both the reincarnation of that lost love, but far less innocent, and Humbert becomes her victim. It's a fascinating and twisted tale in many ways, and I think Nabokov's brilliance is in making Humbert sympathetic.

In truth, I think Jeremy Irons was a brilliant choice to play Humbert.

[harmony_bites]

It really depends on the philosopher--and often, as with so many classics, the translator. I found Plato actually fun to read (yes, I'm perverse) and something like Locke's Second Treatise easy to follow. Aristotle and Kant not so much. Although you know there are different branches of philosophy? Metaphysics (big questions) Epistomology (how do we know what we know) Ethics (how should we act) Politics (how should we organize ourselves) and aesthetics (theory of art). I find ethical and political treatises are often easier to follow--less abstract--so not a surprise in comparison you'd find Machiavelli a soothing read!

Easier to absorb Western concepts too. During the time I was a college drop out, I got a book of "Great Reading" and started reading the "100 Significant Books" Plato and Machiavelli and lots of other stuck in my mind. But damn if I remember one concept from Confucius or the Koran...

[linthornhill]

I knew there were different branches of philosophical thought, and the more abstruse the less I enjoyed them. Truly, I think it's a matter of how the material was presented, and you make an excellent point, and the translation. I have read several copies of Sun Tzu's Art of War, and in some cases, it's completely opaque

[minuet99]

I like the idea of abstracts for things I know that I will never understand. Does that make sense? I don't want Cliff Notes type stuff on stuff I know I can read and comprehend, but I'm all for it on stuff that I know is way out of my league and I want to know about it anyway.

[linthornhill]

Yes, exactly. Also, for things I don't know whether they'll be comprehensible or not (like Schopenhauer), an abstract lets me decide if it's worth the effort to read the source material.

And once again, Zinn's book is fascinating. I respect his raison d'etre quite a bit, although I haven't read enough to know whether it translates into a comprehensive history or merely a platform. However, he expresses his point of view with great eloquence.