i think everyone ought to read whatever books they fucking want. what's with pretentious assholes always telling everybody what they should and shouldn't do?
He isn't telling you what to do. He is struggling with the question of what the best way to live is, he assumes you are doing the same, and he's offering his opinion on one aspect of it.
"Everyone ought to read whatever books they fucking want" isn't that useful as an intellectual opinion. Yes, fine, but what kind of books should we want to read if we want to lead our lives the best way possible? Why read at all?
Well, if he said "If we want to lead our lives the best way possible, then you ought to read this and this, not that" it would still be pretentious. Is it really clear cut that one set from all of literature is the best for everybody? Of course "read whatever you like is a bit on the opposite side, too easy, too shallow. One could then decide "fine, I'll just read kid's comics all my life." Read varied literature, from different cultures, try different genres, and try to read some classics, as they're classics for a reason, would probably be better advice.
Honest question: what is the philosophical basis for the trend I seem to often see (expressed here as "Why read at all?") that pure entertainment is not a valid part of "the best way to live"?
"Although all pleasures are good and all pains evil, Epicurus says that not all pleasures are choiceworthy or all pains to be avoided. Instead, one should calculate what is in one's long-term self-interest, and forgo what will bring pleasure in the short-term if doing so will ultimately lead to greater pleasure in the long-term....
"An example of a natural but non-necessary desire is the desire for luxury food. Although food is needed for survival, one does not need a particular type of food to survive. Thus, despite his hedonism, Epicurus advocates a surprisingly ascetic way of life. Although one shouldn't spurn extravagant foods if they happen to be available, becoming dependent on such goods ultimately leads to unhappiness."
Just off the top of my head, some schools of Buddhism come to mind. Then after a few more seconds it occurs to me that most major religions have some form of ascetic system that frowns upon indulgences such as pure entertainment. In other words, you can have your choice of philosophical bases.
That addresses the "where does it come from?" but not the "why", which I would generalize as entertainment distracts from the pursuit of a better way of living.
Thanks for the answer! I was hoping for more specifics than "some schools of Buddhism" and "ascetic systems from most major religions", but on hindsight I see that asking people to do that level of research for me on a forum like this is too big an ask.
There aren't any specifics, because asceticism is everywhere. From the Zen Buddhist writings of Dogen in the 1200s to modern U. S. Christian Baptists, there's going to be someone standing nearby telling you music and dancing are not good things (one example common to both Dogen and some Baptists).
So where did it originally come from? Who did it or said it first? I have absolutely no idea, nor do I care. So, yeah, you're on your own. :-)
if i want to read something that makes me laugh or gives me an escape for a few hours, who are you guys to tell me i'm wasting my time? mind your own damn business.
Kafka was himself an author. I think authors like to believe that their work changes people, that books and other writing are not simply content to be tailored for specific demographics. His use of 'we' in the quote sort of suggests that he might be speaking mainly for himself. Perhaps he was just trying to explain his particular kind of want.
agree that he probably did not mean it as a universal law, but rather meant that he prefers reading books that confuse and bewilder him. As an example, here's a really short story of his, "A Little Fable":
"
"Alas", said the mouse, "the whole world is growing smaller every day. At the beginning it was so big that I was afraid, I kept running and running, and I was glad when I saw walls far away to the right and left, but these long walls have narrowed so quickly that I am in the last chamber already, and there in the corner stands the trap that I am running into."
"You only need to change your direction," said the cat, and ate it up.
"
My take has always been that what you take out of a given book, whether it's Vince Flynn or James Joyce, has more to do with you as a reader, than the book you're reading.
That is, if you're the kind of person who thinks deeply about things, looks for insights and connections, questions how things work, etc., you're going to draw some insight from a James Patterson book, or Stephen King or whatever.
OTOH, if you're not that kind of person, you can force yourself to grind through mechanically reading the words of Infinite Jest or Gravity's Rainbow, or Ulysses or Finnegan's Wake or whatever, and wind up no better off at the end than if you'd read from a random word generator for the same period of time.
