Pretend You've Read

by Flann O'Brien

What’s it about?

It’s about a man wandering around a rural Irish community after a murder.

Why is everything so weird?

Written in 1940, it’s a surreal satire of Irish social and political attitudes, and also, for some reason, of the then-fresh field of quantum mechanics. These things are all pretty weird already, so why not kick it up a notch? 

So it’s a comedy? 

Well, no. It’s an almost Heideggerian examination of being and time as a man walks through the halls of his own conscience. The gloomy despair is all-pervasive but if you’ve read Game of Thrones and you can’t handle a bit of gloomy despair then you should present yourself to relevant authorities at first light.  

So it’s serious?

Well, no. It’s very silly. There is a policeman who’s turning into a bicycle. There’s a scientist and philosopher who lives exclusively in ever-expanding footnotes called De Selby who is, and this is being charitable, very wrong about literally everything. It’s some of the funniest stuff you will ever read.

What should I say to make people think I’ve read it?

“De Selby is my new and permanent favourite philosopher.”

What should I avoid saying when trying to convince people I’ve read it?

“Alcoholism is the key to these Irish writers.”

Should I actually read it?

by Bram Stoker

What’s it about?

It’s about pre-Brexit Britain, when an unemployed violent criminal from Eastern Europe could just wander into Whitby, Yorkshire and cause all sorts of chaos before, during and after the journey. 

This is nothing like the movies.

No, it’s not. Modern readers will be confronted with a book made up of letters between the characters, diary entries and the occasional news clipping for context. 

Wait. When is this bit happening? Did we go back?

The narrative skips around a bit. Don’t worry about it. It all comes together. Well, it doesn’t, but it’s fine (because it serves the narrative) and anyway, if you’ve read Game of Thrones and you can’t handle a bit of skipping around then you should present yourself to relevant authorities at first light. 

Wait. Is this a sex thing? 

We’ve all been conditioned by movie adaptations who are motivated to push the sexy angle, so probably not. There’s no way to be entirely sure but it’s worth pointing out that it certainly works as a sex metaphor. 

And?

And it works as a metaphor for disease. So, no connection there, then. And certainly no explanation for the sudden explosion of vampire movies in the mid-1980s.

Wait. Is this a feminist thing?

Probably not. But it’s worth pointing out that most of the vampires in the book are women and they all aggressively pursue male victims.

What should I say to make people think I’ve read it?

“Real estate deals never go according to plan.”

What should I avoid saying when trying to convince people I’ve read it?

“My favourite Dracula is Tom Cruise.”

Should I actually read it?

by Leo Tolstoy

What’s it about?

The story spins around a romantic affair between a married woman and a military man (for whom the word “dashing” may have been invented) which ruins her life and scandalises the upper classes of Moscow and St. Petersburg in the mid-1800s.

Why doesn’t she just [whatever]?

Because she’s a woman. One theme of the novel is the jarringly different experience of society for men and women. There are actions and even behaviours which are simply not available to the female characters without catastrophic consequences but which the male characters take for granted. The mere act of existing inside the traditional roles expected by society can be soul-crushing for women.

I’m 500 pages in. What’s all this agricultural stuff with the peasant? Do I need to know how to run a Russian estate? Do I have to read it? 

You don’t have to do anything, but if you’ve read Game of Thrones and you can’t handle long explorations of how most people live most of their lives wandering around a seemingly endless series of ritual chores, you should present yourself to the relevant authorities at first light.

What should I say to make people think I’ve read it?

“Happy families are all alike; every unhappy family is unhappy in its own way.”

What should I avoid saying when trying to convince people I’ve read it?

“She deserves everything she gets.”

Should I actually read it?

by William Shakespeare

What’s it about?

An English king resigns and divides his kingdom among his three daughters. Except the third daughter refused to play a stupid word game and now it’s divided between the remaining two daughters, with catastrophic results. 

I didn’t know kings could resign.

That is very much the point. The idea is that kings are appointed by divine providence, so they can’t just resign. When this one does, everything goes crazy in agonizing slow motion.

That’s not very progressive language.

In this case, it’s accurate. There’s a great scene in the middle of the play where King Lear has lost his mind. He is accompanied by his court jester, whose job it is to be crazy, and another man who is on the run from the law and is pretending to be an escaped lunatic until things blow over. 

But it has a happy ending, right? 

No. Famously, it’s a tragedy. Although if you’ve read Game of Thrones and you can’t handle an unhappy ending, you should present yourself to the relevant authorities at first light.  

What should I say to make people think I’ve read it?

“Nothing will come of nothing.” 

What should I avoid saying when trying to convince people I’ve read it?

“I liked the bit where he gets the kingdom back.”

Should I actually read it?

by Voltaire

What’s it about?

It’s a comedy published in 1759 about a French idiot convinced that everything is amazing, despite the fact that his life takes an increasingly unfortunate series of turns. Although if you’ve read Game of Thrones and you can’t handle a character having the worst luck imaginable, you should present yourself to the relevant authorities at first light.  

That doesn’t sound funny. That sounds sad.

It’s not sad at all. It was written specifically as a response to an assertion by German scientist and philosopher, Gottfried Leibniz, that despite all the horrible stuff, we must necessarily be living in “the best of all possible worlds”, because God wouldn’t allow anything else.

That might be the stupidest thing I’ve ever heard.

Voltaire agrees. This book is basically a short novel version of “this is the stupidest thing I’ve ever heard”. 

What should I say to make people think I’ve read it?

[Any reference to “Pococurante” or doing something “to encourage the others”.]

What should I avoid saying when trying to convince people I’ve read it?

“Things could be worse.”

Should I actually read it?

by Samuel Beckett

What’s it about?

Famously, it’s a play where “nothing happens, twice”.

I can get “nothing” at home. Tell me something else.

Fair enough. It’s a surreal comedy about two guys who spend their lives waiting for something, and as the play goes on, it becomes obvious to everyone except these two guys that it’s never going to happen. Although if you’ve read Game of Thrones and you can’t handle the idea of something that’s never going to happen, you should present yourself to the relevant authorities at first light.  

Sounds like my life.

That’s very much the point. While the audience laughs at the two idiots on stage who can’t see the obvious, at some point around the middle of the second act, you’ll understand that you’re laughing at yourself. Beckett is starting right into your soul and laughing. 

You know satire is working when it feels like it’s mocking you personally.

What should I say to make people think I’ve read it?

“I’ll tell you tomorrow.”

What should I avoid saying when trying to convince people I’ve read it?

“That surprise ending though.”

Should I actually read it?

by T. S. Eliot

What’s it about?

It’s a long, modernist poem in five parts tracking man’s place (or lack thereof) through history and literature.

Modernist?

That basically means it doesn’t rhyme or have a fixed metre.

Don’t we call that “prose”? 

I’m not getting into that. The poem is a series of references to classical and not-so-classical literature and songs expressed as various people from different time periods making prophecies and jokes. 

Although if you’ve read Game of Thrones and you can’t handle a complicated series of interwoven narratives from different times and places, you should present yourself to the relevant authorities at first light.  

That sounds complicated.

If you think that’s complicated, wait until you read the series of notes he wrote to “explain” all the imagery. They’re so abstruse that he might have written them specifically to mock the sort of people who look at a piece of art and ask, “Yes, but what does it mean?” 

What should I say to make people think I’ve read it?

“How can a poem be so full yet broadcast so much emptiness?”

What should I avoid saying when trying to convince people I’ve read it?

“My April didn't go too badly.”

Should I actually read it?

by C. S. Lewis

What’s it about?

It’s about a bunch of kids who find a magical fantasy world in the back of a rural  wardrobe while they’re “on holidays” from London.  

Don’t tell me. It’s really about World War II.

Funnily enough, no. It’s really about - and you’ll like this - Christianity. Although if you’ve read Game of Thrones and you can’t deal with a book failing to deliver the war story you were expecting, you should present yourself to the relevant authorities at first light.  

We already have a book about Christianity. It’s quite famous.

Lewis himself stated that the book is an allegory designed to introduce the themes of Christianity (sacrifice, resurrection etc.) to young people. 

Can’t I just enjoy a story anymore? 

Yes you can. You can completely ignore the religious overtones and just enjoy the story.

Which is?

With the help of some friends, four children save a wintery hellscape from an evil witch. 

What should I say to make people think I’ve read it?

Pretty much any reference to the back of a wardrobe.

What should I avoid saying when trying to convince people I’ve read it?

“So which one of these people represents the Nazis?”

Should I actually read it?

by Plato

What’s it about?

It’s an account of the defence speech made by Socrates at his trial for blasphemy (and corrupting the youth) in Athens in 399 BC. The original meaning of “apology” is “defence”, and carries no implications of regret.

It must have been impressive if it’s “literature”.

Yes. Socrates assumed the worst, and so instead of using his time to sway the jury, he doubled down and made fun of his accusers by name. He also suggested they should keep him on a state pension for life.

Fantastic! How did he celebrate his victory?

He didn’t win. He was sentenced to death. He killed himself in jail soon afterwards. Although if you’ve read Game of Thrones and you can’t handle the best man in the room being killed at the end, you should present yourself to the relevant authorities at first light.

Why is any of this important?

Socrates is widely regarded as laying the foundation for the entire edifice of Western philosophy. For a given definition (involving self-awareness and the application of logic), it’s not an exaggeration to say that Socrates invented thinking. 

What should I say to make people think I’ve read it?

“The unexamined life is not worth living.”

What should I avoid saying when trying to convince people I’ve read it?

“What’s the point of philosophy?”

Should I actually read it?

by Homer

What’s it about?

The exciting sequel to the Iliad, this one’s about a journey, a lengthy series of failed attempts by Odysseus to get home. In English, “odyssey” means “journey”, but originally it just meant “thing about Odysseus”.

He’s the guy with the Trojan Horse, right?

In an episode famously absent from the Iliad, the Wooden Horse of Troy was indeed Odysseus’s idea.

I’ve started it, but where’s Odysseus?

He’s not in the first four books, which concentrate on the efforts of his son, Telemachus, to control the royal household over the ten years Odysseus has been gone. Although if you’ve read Game of Thrones and you can’t handle a narrative that changes character focus, you should present yourself to the relevant authorities at first light.

The many suitors for the dowager queen are ruining the tiny kingdom and food supplies are running low.

Why doesn’t he just kick them out?

Firstly, they’re armed. Secondly, they’re entitled to ask his mother to marry. Thirdly, there is a strong cultural expectation that if anyone shows up at your place, you have to feed them. It’s just a thing. It’s never questioned.

What should I say to make people think I’ve read it?

“I want to go home. By the shortest route possible.”

What should I avoid saying when trying to convince people I’ve read it?

“The bit about the Wooden Horse is my favourite part of this book too!”

Should I actually read it?

by Friedrich Engels and Karl Marx

What’s it about?

Largely the work of Engels, it’s an analysis of human history as a series of class struggles. For some reason, this approach had never occurred to anyone before. 

Stalin was bad. 

Yes, I know.

Glad we’re on the same page. Continue.

Thanks. In this book, published in 1848, Marx and Engels accurately predicted the consumer culture of the twentieth century, and that as an inevitable consequence of capitalism, corporate interests would seek to disempower labour using any means necessary, 

So they were right about everything?

No. They could not have predicted outsourcing slavery to developing nations (called "globalisation") or the extent to which labour could be bought off in a strongly materialist consumer-driven economy. 

This is making me feel uncomfortable. Go back to saying Stalin was bad. 

Stalin was bad. Although if you’ve read Game of Thrones and you can’t handle being uncomfortable occasionally, you should present yourself to the relevant authorities at first light.

What should I say to make people think I’ve read it?

“Workers should control the means of production.”

What should I avoid saying when trying to convince people I’ve read it?

“Stalin.”

Should I actually read it?

by William Golding

What’s it about?

It’s about a group of English schoolboys stuck on a remote tropical island after an airplane crash. Over the course of the short book, they devolve into barbarism and anarchy.

That seems simple enough. 

That’s the cover story. There are layers underneath. It’s about the powerful self-destructive and competitive parts of human nature, social organisation, and the possibility that we’re all just one plane crash away from literally eating each other. 

That sounds kind of dark and violent.

It’s as dark as it needs to be, although if you’ve read Game of Thrones and you think Lord of the Flies is too dark and violent, you should probably present yourself to the relevant authorities at first light.

What should I say to make people think I’ve read it?

“Civilisation is hard work.”

What should I avoid saying when trying to convince people I’ve read it?

"I’m not reading a massive book about elves and dragons.”

Should I actually read it?

by Kurt Vonnegut Jr.

What’s it about?

It’s about an optometrist who, as a result of exposure to a low-rate science fiction author in a psychiatric hospital, believes he has been abducted by aliens and can travel through time.

What’s it really about?

In perhaps the biggest disjoint between the first and second paragraphs of these blog posts, it’s about the cruel nature of war, in particular the experience of prisoners of war in Nazi Germany.

What? How did we get from there to here?

Unlike most works of science fiction, the science fiction element is almost irrelevant; it’s nothing but a scaffolding to construct the real story: what his experiences as a prisoner of war in Germany taught him about human nature. Although if you’ve read Game of Thrones and you can’t handle a supernatural narrative device used to recount the inhumanity of war, you should probably present yourself to the relevant authorities at first light.

What should I say to make people think I’ve read it?

“So it goes.”

What should I avoid saying when trying to convince people I’ve read it?

"It’s not as good as Slaughterhouse Four.”

Should I actually read it?

by J.R.R. Tolkien

What’s it about?

It’s about a fantasy world of dragons and elves and dark forces where everything good will be destroyed unless two unpretentious rural folk throw a powerful ring into a volcano halfway across the continent.

That sounds specific.

It is heavily implied that this was one of a number of possible strategies, and it is further implied that there are many powerful, intelligent people who believe the chosen strategy to be extremely stupid and destined to fail.

This book has like a million pages. Surely there’s something else?

Tolkien has created an entire universe with epic battles of good and evil, high adventure, courtly romance, political intrigue and friends overcoming adversity. But this is a blog post not a Wikipedia page.

What should I say to make people think I’ve read it?

"This is the beginning of the modern fantasy genre.”

What should I avoid saying when trying to convince people I’ve read it?

“I could doing with hearing more from Tom Bombadil.”

Should I actually read it?

by Sigmund Freud

What’s it about?

A Viennese cocaine addict blames everything on repressed childhood sexual trauma.

This is non-fiction?

Yes. This is the book that invented psychoanalysis, thereby rescuing countless women (and a few men) from being locked away in insane asylums whose priority was not treatment, but containment. There is no doubt, however that Freud's initial conceptionion is deeply flawed. 

I have heard about his theories on, er, inter-familial sexual tension.

He genuinely, however incorrectly, believed that the root of everyone's neuroses was the unresolved Oedipus complex.  Although, if you’ve read Game of Thrones and you can’t process the idea of family members being sexually attracted to each other, you should present yourself to the relevant authorities at first light.

So he got it wrong?

As with many pioneering geniuses, the reason this book is so important isn't because he came up with all the correct answers, but because he asked the right questions, questions that no one had thought of before, and which would change our understanding of what it means to be stressed, what it means to suffer from mental illness or a behavioural disorder, and even what it means to have a consciousness at all.

What should I say to make people think I’ve read it?

“Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.”

What should I avoid saying when trying to convince people I’ve read it?

“Psychotherapy is for the weak-minded.”

Should I actually read it?

by Jules Verne

What’s it about?

In a sentence, it’s about a taciturn toff who makes an unlikely bet and marries an Indian Princess.

I’m ten pages in. I don’t like the main guy.

It is difficult to like Phileas Fogg. He wins all his chess games, hangs around a Gentleman's Club all day reading newspapers, is massively wealthy, knows everything about everything and generally comes across as a Mary Sue. He falls almost accidently into the eponymous bet, but puts all his time and energy into making sure he wins.

The rest of the book is full of high adventure and depictions of foreign lands which appear quaint to us now, but the inevitable racism is more innocent than mean-spirited. 

What’s the point? Are we learning anything?

This is a purely fun read, so don't expect dense political analysis. The primary take-away seems to be that limitless funds will make your ad hoc travel plans easier. Although, if you’ve read Game of Thrones and you don’t like the idea of a character who can always buy his way out of trouble, you should present yourself to the relevant authorities at first light.

What should I say to make people think I’ve read it?

"Would he not have noticed the time change in San Francisco? No?”

What should I avoid saying when trying to convince people I’ve read it?

“The balloon ride was my favourite bit!”

Should I actually read it?

by James Joyce

What’s it about?

It’s about a man walking around Dublin and all the things he sees and thinks about. The whole book takes place over the course of one day. It might be the first book which takes longer to read than the events it portrays.

I’ve heard ... things. Dark mutterings. 

Yes. It’s a famously “difficult” read. One entire chapter is a single sentence. There are lots of chunks of text that seem to be sound effects, and it often transliterates the play-by-play of someone’s interior monologue. A lot of the time it’s less something you read and more something you allow happen to you.

That sounds awful. I’m out.

No! I don’t want to give you the wrong idea here, so I should probably mention that it’s very funny. As with Lolita, it’s full of word games, puns, straight-up jokes with proper punchlines, and complicated language puzzles for you to solve which most people won’t even notice. 

When asked for a summary of this book, Joyce himself said, “I've put in so many enigmas and puzzles that it will keep the professors busy for centuries arguing over what I meant”. It sounds like a pretentious intellectual boast, but when you read the book you will see that the quote is better understood as the frank admission of some next-level trolling. 

In Ulysses, Joyce trolls everyone. He trolls his friends, his enemies, his family, Irish people in general and some specific Irish people. There’s probably some part of the book that trolls you. Like Beckett’s advanced trolling operations, he gets around to everyone eventually. 

Basically, if you’ve read Game of Thrones and you can’t handle a book that gets around to destroying everyone at some point, you should present yourself to the relevant authorities at first light. 

What should I say to make people think I’ve read it?

[Believe it or not]: “I never managed to get through the whole thing.”

What should I avoid saying when trying to convince people I’ve read it?

“The Jews again, of course. Yeah.”

Should I actually read it?